energies

Article
Optimizing the Performance of Solo Duck Wave
Energy Converter in Tide
Jinming Wu 1 , Yingxue Yao 2, *, Wei Li 3 , Liang Zhou 1 and Malin Göteman 3
1 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150001, Heilongjiang, China;
wujinming@hit.edu.cn (J.W.); lzhou@hit.edu.cn (L.Z.)
2 Shenzhen Graduate School, Harbin Institute of Technology, Shenzhen 518055, Guangdong, China
3 Department of Engineering Science, Uppsala University, Uppsala 75121, Sweden;
wei.li@angstrom.uu.se (W.L.); malin.goteman@angstrom.uu.se (M.G.)
* Correspondence: yxyao@hit.edu.cn; Tel.: +86-755-2603-6868

Academic Editor: Stephen Nash

Received: 24 January 2017; Accepted: 22 February 2017; Published: 28 February 2017

Abstract: The high efficiency performance of the Edinburgh Duck wave energy converter (WEC) in
2D regular wave tests makes it a promising wave energy conversion scheme. A solo Duck WEC will
be able to apply the point absorber effect to further enhance its performance. Since released degree
of freedom will decrease the efficiency, a Duck WEC with fixed pitching axis will be a better option.
However, for fixed supported WECs, tide is a non-ignorable consideration. In this paper, a movable
mass method is utilized in the whole tidal range to not only balance the Duck to appropriate beak
angles, but also follow the variation of hydrodynamic coefficients to keep cancelling the reactance
of the system impedance so that complex conjugate control can be realized to optimize the power
capture performance of the Duck WEC in tide. Results show that the beak angle should be adjusted
to as large a value as possible so that the response amplitude of the Duck at maximum relative
capture width will be reasonable small, and the lowest weight of the movable mass is found when its
designed position locates at the center of the Duck profile.

Keywords: solo Duck; hydrodynamic coefficients; complex conjugate control; maximum relative
capture width; movable mass method

1. Introduction
In order to develop a cleaner and safer energy supply, ocean wave energy conversion has been
attracting extensive research in recent years [1–3]. The Edinburgh Duck wave energy converter (WEC),
which was invented by Stephen Salter in 1974 [4], is one of the most efficient wave energy conversion
schemes ever proposed. The Duck WEC is of terminator type, and one proposal of its cross section is
shown in Figure 1a [5]. The cross section rotates about O and its profile can be divided into three parts:
stern, paunch and beak. The stern part is of circular shape with O as its center point. The paunch part
is formed so that the profile matches the diameter of the orbital movement of water particles at each
depth [6]. The high efficiency character of this cross section results from its asymmetrical property.
Evans [7] and Mei [8] had revealed that, for a two-dimensional cylinder with single pitching mode,
the maximum efficiency Emax can be calculated by:

1
Emax = (1)
1 + | A− /A+ |2

where A+ and A− are the radiated wave amplitude at x → +∞ and x → −∞ due to forced unit
amplitude pitching velocity. Since the circular stern part of the Duck produces only very small

Energies 2017, 10, 289; doi:10.3390/en10030289 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2017, 10, 289 2 of 19
Energies 2017, 10, 289 2 of 18

wave amplitude
amplitude leeward,
leeward, the maximum
the maximum efficiency
efficiency willwill
be be high.
high. Experimentaltests
Experimental testsinin regular
regular wave
wave
conditions confirmed more than 90% efficiency [9] and validated this theory.
conditions confirmed more than 90% efficiency [9] and validated this theory.

(a) (b)

Figure 1.
Figure 1. Geometry
Geometryof ofthe
thesolo
soloDuck
Duckwave
wave energy
energy conversion
conversion (WEC):
(WEC): (a) plane
(a) plane viewview
of theofDuck
the Duck
cross
cross section; and (b) isometric view of the taut mooring configuration for a Duck with fixed
section; and (b) isometric view of the taut mooring configuration for a Duck with fixed pitching axis in
pitching
head axis in head on waves.
on waves.

In the early design envisage of the Duck WEC, a plurality of Duck members are connected by
In the early design envisage of the Duck WEC, a plurality of Duck members are connected by end
end to end jointed spines with the intention to average the hydrodynamic forces on the axis
to end jointed spines with the intention to average the hydrodynamic forces on the axis supporting
supporting system so that the mooring forces are reduced in real sea wave climate [6]. However, the
system so that the mooring forces are reduced in real sea wave climate [6]. However, the mechanical
mechanical system was very complex, and the estimated low reliability of the system, especially the
system was very complex, and the estimated low reliability of the system, especially the high failure
high failure rate of the mooring cables, caused the UK government to cancel the project [9]. Later, the
rate of the mooring cables, caused the UK government to cancel the project [9]. Later, the research
research interest of the Duck WEC has shifted to the solo Duck configuration, whose efficiency will
interest of the Duck WEC has shifted to the solo Duck configuration, whose efficiency will be further
be further increased by applying the point absorber effect [5,10] and the mooring system may also be
increased by applying the point absorber effect [5,10] and the mooring system may also be simpler.
simpler. Skyner applied a sophisticated supporting rig to measure the hydrodynamic coefficients of
Skyner applied a sophisticated supporting rig to measure the hydrodynamic coefficients of a solo
a solo Duck, based on which the power absorption was predicted and agreed well with experimental
Duck, based on which the power absorption was predicted and agreed well with experimental
results, and it showed that the solo Duck can achieve a capture width 1.6 times the Duck width in
results, and it showed that the solo Duck can achieve a capture width 1.6 times the Duck width in
regular wave, and the theoretical maximum capture width can be achieved by applying a complex
regular wave, and the theoretical maximum capture width can be achieved by applying a complex
conjugate controller by setting the controller impedance as the complex conjugate of the radiation
conjugate controller by setting the controller impedance as the complex conjugate of the radiation
impedance [5]. Pizer used a three-dimensional linear wave diffraction program to investigate the
impedance [5]. Pizer used a three-dimensional linear wave diffraction program to investigate the
performance of a solo Duck, and motion constraints are also studied when taking both physical and
performance of a solo Duck, and motion constraints are also studied when taking both physical and
linear theory limitations into consideration, and results revealed that although under constraints the
linear theory limitations into consideration, and results revealed that although under constraints
solo Duck can achieve a relative capture width of over 2 and the performance decreases with more
the solo Duck can achieve a relative capture width of over 2 and the performance decreases with
released motion freedom [10]. Actually, this performance reducing character is also observed in the
more released motion freedom [10]. Actually, this performance reducing character is also observed
spine based Duck investigated by Mynett et al. [11]. Thus, for a solo Duck WEC, a fixed pitching axis
in the spine based Duck investigated by Mynett et al. [11]. Thus, for a solo Duck WEC, a fixed
is a better option. One possible taut mooring configuration for the Duck with fixed pitching axis in
pitching axis is a better option. One possible taut mooring configuration for the Duck with fixed
head on waves is shown in Figure 1b. This mooring scheme is evolved from the
pitching axis in head on waves is shown in Figure 1b. This mooring scheme is evolved from the
multi-degree-of-freedom-power-absorbing mooring configuration proposed in [10] by removing the
multi-degree-of-freedom-power-absorbing mooring configuration proposed in [10] by removing the
power take-off (PTO) devices from the tension legs. If the margin of the pre-tension and the stiffness
power take-off (PTO) devices from the tension legs. If the margin of the pre-tension and the stiffness of
of the tension legs are large enough, we can treat the Duck pitching axis as fixed. For a fixed
the tension legs are large enough, we can treat the Duck pitching axis as fixed. For a fixed supporting
supporting WEC, tide is a non-ignorable consideration. Castellucci et al. [12–14] investigated the
WEC, tide is a non-ignorable consideration. Castellucci et al. [12–14] investigated the effect of tide
effect of tide to the performance of wave energy converters, and proposed a tide compensation
to the performance of wave energy converters, and proposed a tide compensation method to reduce
method to reduce the influence of tide by expanding and contracting the length of the connection
the influence of tide by expanding and contracting the length of the connection line for a fixed
line for a fixed stator point absorber WEC. In a tidal period, the fixed pitching axis Duck is exposed
stator point absorber WEC. In a tidal period, the fixed pitching axis Duck is exposed to continuously
to continuously varying tidal height, resulting in its varying floating states in equilibrium position.
varying tidal height, resulting in its varying floating states in equilibrium position. The corresponding
The corresponding hydrodynamic coefficients and hydrostatic stiffness coefficients will also change
hydrodynamic coefficients and hydrostatic stiffness coefficients will also change accordingly, causing
accordingly, causing the Duck to deviate from its designed optimal working state.
the Duck to deviate from its designed optimal working state.
In order to optimize the performance of a wave energy sea water desalination device at
In order to optimize the performance of a wave energy sea water desalination device at different
different wave climate, Lucas et al. [15] used the removable mass method by realizing complex
wave climate, Lucas et al. [15] used the removable mass method by realizing complex conjugate control.
conjugate control. However, the best designed position of the movable mass is not investigated. In
this paper, the movable mass method is utilized in the whole tidal range to not only balance the
Duck to appropriate beak angles in different tidal heights, but also follow the variation of
Energies 2017, 10, 289 3 of 19

However, the best designed position of the movable mass is not investigated. In this paper, the movable
mass method is utilized in the whole tidal range to not only balance the Duck to appropriate beak
angles in different tidal heights, but also follow the variation of hydrodynamic coefficients to keep
cancelling the reactance of the system impedance so that complex conjugate control can be realized to
optimize power capture performance of the Duck WEC in tide. At first, the character of hydrodynamic
coefficients is studied for a range of floating states at different tidal heights. Then, the maximum
relative capture width achieved by applying complex conjugate control at different floating states is
investigated to determine the best floating state at different tidal heights. Furthermore, the hydrostatic
stiffness coefficient is studied to confirm the feasibility of realizing the optimal control by adjusting the
position of the mass center. Finally, a case study is performed based on the previous results to find the
trajectory of the movable mass in tide and to find the best designed position of the movable mass to
achieve the lowest movable mass weight.

2. Geometry and Floating States of the Duck

The detailed description of the geometry of the solo Duck is shown in Figure 1, where θb is the
beak angle; d is the depth of rotation axis O, i.e., the pitching axis; R is the radius of the stern part; G is
the gravity center of the rotating mass; L and α are the radial distance and angle of the gravity center
of the rotating mass, respectively; and h is the water depth. Oxyz is the global Cartesian coordinate
system with x in wave propagating direction, y in longitudinal direction of the Duck and z in the
opposite direction of gravity with z = 0 representing the still water level. The dimension of the Duck is
the same as that in [10] and is 100:1 scale compared to the dimension of the experimental model used
in [5]. In accordance with the experimental setup, we have h = 60 m, R = 5 m and the width of Duck
W = 29 m.
At different tidal heights, the Duck will present different floating states. In order to understand the
influence of tidal height on the hydrodynamic performance of the Duck, a range of floating states are
studied. Although the tidal range differs globally, the overall law is that the nearer the coast, the larger
the tidal range [16,17]. Since the solo Duck WEC is an off-shore device in open sea, we choose the tidal
range to be HT = 3 m, which belongs to the meso-tidal range (2–4 m) [18]. The floating state of the
Duck is characterized by two parameters: the depth of rotation axis d and the beak angle θb , and their
values are listed in Table 1. Floating states No. 1–5 vary the depth of rotation axis from the lowest tidal
height −HT /2 to the highest HT /2 with the beak angle be kept constant at θb = 132◦ . Floating states
No. 6–9 vary the beak angle from 108◦ , where the Duck almost loses its asymmetry property, to 156◦ ,
where the beak nearly touches the free surface, with the depth of rotation axis be kept constant at
d = 5.5 m. Therefore, the listed floating states represent a large range of attitudes the Duck is possible
to present in different tidal heights.

Table 1. Value of characteristic parameters of the floating state.

Floating State No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

d, m 4 4.75 5.5 6.25 7 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5
θb , deg 132 132 132 132 132 108 120 144 156

3. Theoretical Modeling
In this paper, the linear wave theory is applied to study the hydrodynamic performance of the solo
Duck at different floating states. Assume the wave amplitude to be small relative to the wavelength,
and the water particle motion to be irrotational and incompressible. Complex amplitudes are used to
simplify the expressions. Pitch excursion of the Duck WEC is defined as:
n o
ξ = Re ξ̂eiωt (2)
Energies 2017, 10, 289 4 of 19

where ξ̂ is the complex amplitude of pitch excursion; ω is the circular frequency of incident wave; and
t is the flow time. Hence, the complex amplitude of pitch velocity can be obtained as:
.̂
ξ = iωξ̂ (3)

and the complex amplitude of pitch acceleration as:

..ˆ
ξ = −ω2 ξ̂ (4)

We can easily get the dynamic motion equation of the Duck as:

[−( J + Je )ω2 + (C + Ce )iω + Kr ]ξ̂ = M̂ (5)

where J, C and Kr are the added inertia, radiation damping coefficient and hydrostatic stiffness
coefficient of the Duck in pitch direction due to pitch motion, respectively; Je is the dry inertia of the
Duck itself in pitch direction; Ce is the PTO damping coefficient; and M̂ is the complex amplitude of
excitation moment in pitch direction. In accordance with the definition in [19], we define the system
impedance as the summation of the radiation impedance and mechanical impedance by:

Zs = ω(C + Ce ) + [Kr − ω2 ( J + Je )]i (6)

where ω(C + Ce ) is the resistance term and [Kr − ω2 (J + Je )]i is the reactance term. The complex
amplitude of wave amplitude  is defined as:

 = A0 (7)

where A0 is the amplitude of incident wave and it is a real value. Then, the complex amplitude of pitch
excursion can be expressed by:
ξ̂ = A0 ξ0 eiφ (8)

where ξ0 is the modulus of complex amplitude of pitch excursion per unit wave amplitude; and φ is
phase difference between the complex amplitude of pitch excursion and Â. In addition, the excitation
moment can be expressed by:
M̂ = A0 M0 ei(φ+ψ) (9)

where M0 is the modulus of complex amplitude of excitation moment per unit wave amplitude;
and ψ is phase difference between the complex amplitude of excitation moment and ξ̂. By inserting
the expression for ξ̂, M̂ and Zs into Equation (5), the pitch excursion per unit wave amplitude is
obtained as:
M0 iψ
ξ0 = e (10)
Zs
The power captured by the Duck can be calculated by:

1 .̂ .̂ * 1 Ce ω2 A20 M02
Pcapture = Ce ξξ = Ce ω2 A20 ξ20 = (11)
2 2 2| Zs |2

where * denotes the complex conjugate. In linear regular wave, for finite water depth, the incident
wave power flux per unit wave front can be calculated by [20,21]:

ρgA20 ω
 
2kh
Pincident = 1+ (12)
4k sinh(2kh)
Energies 2017, 10, 289 5 of 19

where ρ is the density of water, g is the acceleration of gravity, k is the wave number, and they satisfy
the dispersion relation:
ω2 = gk tan(kh) (13)

The relative capture width η, which is extensively used in representing the efficiency of
WECs
Energies [22–24], is defined by dividing the captured power by incident power flux and characteristic
2017, 10, 289 5 of 18
length of the WEC. For the solo Duck, the relative capture width becomes:
Pcapture 2 M22 ω33 C
η =Pcapture = 2M00ω Cee2 11
η= P W= 2 hé kh iùú
22kh (14)
(14)
Pincident W
incident ρg2 W
ρg W| ZZ s| tanh( kh ê1 +
2
s tanh( kh ) 1 +
ê sinh(2kh
sinh(2 kh) ) úû
ë
In
In Equation
Equation (14),
(14), the
the added
added inertia,
inertia, damping
damping coefficient
coefficient and
and excitation
excitation moment
moment are are calculated
calculated
by
by the
the boundary
boundary element method (BEM) by using ANSYS ANSYS AQWA
AQWA [25] software (Version 16.0;
ANSYS:
ANSYS: Canonsburg, PA, PA, USA).
USA). Since
Since the
theDuck
Duckisissymmetrical
symmetricaltotothe y =y 0= plane,
the 0 plane, only
only halfhalf of
of the
the
DuckDuck is modeled
is modeled to decrease
to decrease computational
computational costs.
costs. Figure
Figure 2 shows
2 shows an example
an example of the
of the BEMBEM mesh
mesh for
for
the the
Duck Duck at floating
at floating state state
No. 8.No. 8. Aoftotal
A total 1250ofpanels
1250 are
panels
usedare used tothe
to model model
Duck the DuckHowever,
surface. surface.
However, only diffraction
only diffraction panels underpanels under
the free the free surface
surface will be will be computed,
computed, while while the panels
the panels aboveabove the
the free
free surface
surface are neglected.
are neglected.

Figure 2.
Figure 2. An
An example
example of
of the
the boundary
boundary element
element method
method (BEM)
(BEM) mesh
mesh for
for the Duck at
the Duck at floating
floating state
state
No. 8.
No. 8.

The BEM method is validated by comparing the calculated hydrodynamic coefficients with the
The BEM method is validated by comparing the calculated hydrodynamic coefficients with the
experimental results in [5]. The floating state of the Duck in the experiment is the same as the
experimental results in [5]. The floating state of the Duck in the experiment is the same as the floating
floating state No. 8 but with a 1:100 scale of dimension. Thus, the floating state No. 8 is scaled to the
state No. 8 but with a 1:100 scale of dimension. Thus, the floating state No. 8 is scaled to 3the same
same dimension of the experimental setup and the water density is set to 1000 kg/m to keep
dimension of the experimental setup and the water density is set to 1000 kg/m3 to keep consistent
consistent with the fresh water used in the wave tank. The comparison results are shown in Figure
with the fresh water used in the wave tank. The comparison results are shown in Figure 3, where Z,
3, where Z, which is called “radiation impedance” in [5], is defined as:
which is called “radiation impedance” in [5], is defined as:
1
Z(ω) = C (ω) + iω J (ω) + iω J e + 1 K r (15)
Z (ω) = C (ω) + iωJ (ω) + iωJe + iω Kr (15)
iω
In the experimental setup, Je = 0.0636 Kg·m2, and Kr = 1.165 N·m. The BEM results agree well
In the experimental
the experiment indicating that Jthe
setup, e = BEM Kg·m2 ,isand
0.0636method Kr = 1.165
credible N·m. The
to predict BEM results agree
the hydrodynamic well the
coefficients
experiment indicating
of the solo Duck thatfloating
at other the BEM method is credible to predict the hydrodynamic coefficients of the
states.
solo Duck at other floating states.
0.1 0.1 30
BEM BEM BEM
0 Exp. Exp. Exp.
Re(Z), N.m.s
Im(Z), N.m.s

20
-0.1
M0, N

0.05
-0.2
10
-0.3
-0.4 0 0
0.5 1 1.5 2 0.5 1 1.5 2 0.5 1 1.5 2
f, Hz f, Hz f, Hz
(a) (b) (c)

Figure 3. Comparison of hydrodynamic coefficients between the BEM and experimental results for
 1
Z(ω) = C (ω) + iω J (ω) + iω J e + K (15)
iω r

In the experimental setup, Je = 0.0636 Kg·m2, and Kr = 1.165 N·m. The BEM results agree well
the experiment
Energies 2017, 10, 289 indicating that the BEM method is credible to predict the hydrodynamic coefficients
6 of 19
of the solo Duck at other floating states.

0.1 0.1 30
BEM BEM BEM
0 Exp. Exp. Exp.

Re(Z), N.m.s
Im(Z), N.m.s

20
-0.1

M0, N
0.05
-0.2
10
-0.3
-0.4 0 0
0.5 1 1.5 2 0.5 1 1.5 2 0.5 1 1.5 2
f, Hz f, Hz f, Hz
(a) (b) (c)

Figure 3. Comparison of hydrodynamic coefficients between the BEM and experimental results for
Figure 3. Comparison of hydrodynamic coefficients between the BEM and experimental results for
1:100 scaled Duck at floating state No. 8: (a) added inertia; (b) radiation damping coefficient; and (c)
1:100 scaled Duck at floating state No. 8: (a) added inertia; (b) radiation damping coefficient; and (c)
excitation momentcoefficient.
excitation moment coefficient.

4. Results and Discussion

In this section, the character of hydrodynamic coefficients is firstly studied for a range of floating
states at different tidal heights. Then, the maximum relative capture width achieved by applying
complex conjugate control at different floating states is investigated to determine the best floating state
at different tidal heights. Furthermore, the hydrostatic stiffness coefficient is studied to confirm the
feasibility of realizing the optimal control by adjusting the position of the mass center. Finally, a case
study is performed based on the previous results to find the trajectory of the movable mass in tide and
to find the best designed position of the movable mass to achieve the lowest movable mass weight.

4.1. Hydrodynamic Coefficients

Figure 4 shows the added inertia as a function of wave frequency at different floating states.
The added inertia increases with depth of rotation axis monotonously when θb = 144◦ and also increases
with beak angle monotonously when d = 5.5 m. From Salter’s experimental result, one conclusion
is made that the added inertia of the Duck increases with water line length [26]. Figure 5 shows the
added inertia variation with characteristic parameters of the wetted surface of the Duck at different
wave frequencies. In Figure 5a, we find that the added inertia increases with water line length
only when the depth of rotation axis is fixed, while this relation is reversed when the beak angle
is fixed. In general, the added inertia varies disorderly with the water line length. In fact, the added
inertia is physically caused by the synchronous motion of the water near the oscillating body surface.
In Figure 6a, a small piece of water near the wetted surface of the Duck is shown to demonstrate its
flow pattern. Suppose the surface of the Duck is impermeable and of non-slip condition, which is the
common case, the water particles at the wetted surface will follow its motion velocity. Then, the water
near the wetted surface will follow the oscillating pitch motion of the Duck. Although the flow
pattern is essentially very complex, we believe that the volume of the followed water should be
proportional to the width of the water piece, which is the mapped length of the small segment on
the Duck surface in the normal direction of its velocity. In addition, according to the definition
of moment of inertia, the inertia of the followed water should also be proportional to square of
its rotating radius. Here, we define a new parameter, named water inertia, to include all relevant
parameters that are proportional to water inertia to account for the added inertia caused by the
followed water oscillation as:
Jw = ds · cos γ · l 2 (16)

where ds is the length of the segment on the Duck surface; γ is the angle between the normal vector
of the segment and its velocity direction; and l is the rotation radius. Hence the water inertia will be
proportional to added inertia. Figure 6b shows the distribution of the water inertia over the wetted
surface of the Duck at d = 5.5 m and θb = 144◦ . The paunch part contributes most to the water inertia,
while the contribution from the stern part is small. Especially in the circular stern part, the water inertia
Energies 2017, 10, 289 7 of 19

is almost zero. The total water inertia for the Duck at certain floating state is obtained by integrating
Equation (16) over the whole wetted surface. Figure 5b shows the added inertia variation with the
total water inertia at different wave frequencies. It is interesting to find that the distribution of the
added inertia is almost reduced to a straight line, which agrees with the previous hypothesis that the
water inertia be proportional with added inertia. The fitted lines for different wave frequencies are
also shown in Figure 5b. Small scattering of the points from the fitted lines are observed indicating
that the added inertia caused by the oscillation water motion is very complex and more elaborate
calculation should be performed to precisely predict the added inertia. However, we found that the
total water inertia is an important factor to qualitatively estimate the added inertia of Duck at certain
wave frequency, and this provides a profile reference parameter in understanding the added inertia
and even designing the profile of other pitching devices without performing large amount of BEM
simulations
Energies ahead.
2017, 10, 289 7 of 18
Energies 2017, 10, 289 7 of 18
8 8
x 10 x 10
2 8 2 8
x 10 x 10
2 d=4 m 2 θb=108o
d=4 m m
=4.75 θb=108oo
d=4.75
=5.5 mm θb=120
1.5 1.5
d=5.5
=6.25mm θb=120oo
1.5 1.5 θb=132
d=6.25
=7 m m
θb=132oo
2 2

2 2

d=7 m
J, Kg.m

J, Kg.m

θb=144
1 1
θb=144oo
J, Kg.m

J, Kg.m

1 1 θb=156
θb=156o
0.5 0.5
0.5 0.5

0 0
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
0 0
0.05 0.1 f, Hz 0.15 0.2 0.05 0.1 f, Hz 0.15 0.2
(a)f, Hz (b)f, Hz
(a) (b)
Figure 4. Added inertia as a function of wave frequency at different floating states: (a) for fixed beak
Figure 4. Added
Figureat4.θAdded inertia
inertia as a
asfor function
a function of wave
of wave frequency
frequency at different floating states: (a) for fixed beak
angle b = 144°;
◦ and (b) fixed depth of rotation axis at
at different
d = 5.5 m.floating states: (a) for fixed beak
angle at
angle at θθbb == 144°;
144 ;and
and(b)
(b)for
for fixed
fixed depth
depth of
of rotation
rotation axis at dd ==5.5
axis at 5.5m.
m.
8 8
x 10 x 10
3 8 3 8
x 10 o x 10 o
3 f=0.06 Hz at θb=132 3 f=0.06 Hz at θb=132
o o
2.5 f=0.06 Hz at θb=132 2.5 f=0.06 Hz at θb=132
f=0.06 Hz at d=5.5 m f=0.06 Hz at d=5.5 m
2.5 ff=0.06 2.5
=0.12 Hz
Hz at
at dθ=5.5
b
=132mo ff=0.06
=0.12 Hz
Hz at
at dθ=5.5
b
=132mo
2 f=0.12 Hz at θb=132
o 2 f=0.12 Hz at θb=132
o
2 f=0.12 Hz at d=5.5 m 2 f=0.12 Hz at d=5.5 m
2 2
2 2

J, Kg.m
J, Kg.m

ff=0.12
=0.18 Hz
Hz at
at dθ=5.5
=132m
o ff=0.12
=0.18 Hz
Hz at
at dθ=5.5
=132mo
1.5 1.5
J, Kg.m

b
J, Kg.m

o b o
1.5 f=0.18 Hz at θb=132 1.5 f=0.18 Hz at θb=132
f=0.18 Hz at d=5.5 m f=0.18 Hz at d=5.5 m
1 f=0.18 Hz at d=5.5 m 1 f=0.18 Hz at d=5.5 m
1 1
0.5 0.5
0.5 0.5
0 0
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 200 300 400 500 600
0 0
7 8 9 Water10line length,
11 m12 13 14 200 300 Total water m3
400 inertia,500 600
Water(a)
line length, m water inertia, m3
Total (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 5. Added inertia variation with characteristic parameters of the wetted surface of the Duck at
Figure 5. Added
different inertia variation
(a) for with characteristic parameters of the wetted surface
Theof the Duck at
Figure 5. wave
Addedfrequencies:
inertia variation water line length; and
with characteristic (b) for total
parameters of water inertia.
the wetted surface red
of solid line,
the Duck
different
blue wave
dashedwavefrequencies:
line and (a) for
magenta (a) water
dash-dotline length;
lineline and
denote (b) for
the and total water
fitted(b)lines inertia. The red solid line,
at different frequencies: for water length; for at f = water
total 0.06, 0.1 and 0.16
inertia. The Hz,
red
blue
solid dashed
respectively. linedashed
line, blue and magenta
line anddash-dot
magenta line denote
dash-dot thedenote
line fitted the
linesfitted
at f lines
= 0.06,
at 0.1
f = and
0.06,0.16 Hz,
0.1 and
respectively.
0.16 Hz, respectively.
5
5 free surface 15
free surface 15
0 Jw
0 Jw 10
10
z, m

R=5 m
z, m

-5 R=5 m
-5 O
O 5
-10 5
-10

-15 -10 -5 0 5 10
 Water line length, m Total water inertia, m3
(a) (b)

Figure 5. Added inertia variation with characteristic parameters of the wetted surface of the Duck at
different wave frequencies: (a) for water line length; and (b) for total water inertia. The red solid line,
blue
Energies dashed
2017, 10, 289 line and magenta dash-dot line denote the fitted lines at f = 0.06, 0.1 and 0.16 Hz,8 of 19
respectively.

5
free surface 15

0 Jw
10

z, m
R=5 m
-5
O
5
-10

-15 -10 -5 0 5 10
x, m
(a) (b)

Figure 6. Demonstration of the water inertia: (a) the flow pattern of a small piece of water near the
Figure 6. Demonstration of the water inertia: (a) the flow pattern of a small piece of water near the
wetted Duck surface; and (b) distribution of the water inertia along the wetted Duck surface at d =
wetted Duck surface; and (b) distribution of the water inertia along the wetted Duck surface at d = 5.5 m
5.5
andmθ and θb ◦=. 144°.
= 144 b

Figure 7 shows the radiation damping coefficient as a function of wave frequency at different
Figure 7 shows the radiation damping coefficient as a function of wave frequency at different
floating states. The radiation damping coefficient increases with beak angle monotonously when θb
floating
= 144° and states. The radiation
also increases damping
with beak anglecoefficient
when d = increases
5.5 m andwith beak
a little angle monotonously
exception is observed forwhenbeak
θb = 144 ◦ andatalso increasesaround
with beak angle whenthe d= 5.5 m and a little coefficient
exception is observed for
angle
Energiesof 156°
2017, 10, 289 frequencies 0.2 Hz, where radiation damping decreases with
8 of 18
beak angle of 156◦ at frequencies around 0.2 Hz, where the radiation damping coefficient decreases
with
beak beak
angle. angle.
Figure Figure
8 shows8 shows the excitation
the excitation moment
moment coefficient
coefficient as aasfunction
a function of wave
of wave frequency
frequency at
at different floating states. The excitation moment coefficient increases with depth
different floating states. The excitation moment coefficient increases with depth of rotation axis of rotation axis
◦
when
when θθbb == 144144° andand increases
increases with
with beak
beak angle when dd =
angle when = 5.5
5.5 m,
m, and
and aa small
small decreasing
decreasing trend
trend is is
observed for the beak angle of 156 ◦ at frequencies around 0.2 Hz. Actually, the similar variation law
observed for the beak angle of 156° at frequencies around 0.2 Hz. Actually, the similar variation law
of
of the
the added
added inertia,
inertia, radiation
radiation damping
damping coefficient
coefficient and
and excitation
excitation moment
moment coefficient
coefficient with
with floating
floating
states
states is expected, since they all only depend on the shape of the wetted surface at certain frequency.
is expected, since they all only depend on the shape of the wetted surface at certain frequency.
The
The same
same variation
variation in in the
the wetted
wetted surface
surface shape
shape may
may bebe reasonable
reasonable to to result
result in
in the
the same
same variation
variation in in
hydrodynamic coefficients.
hydrodynamic coefficients.
7 7
x 10 x 10
8 8
d=4 m θb=108o
7 d=4.75 m 7

6 d=5.5 m 6 θb=120o
d=6.25 m
5 5 θb=132o
d=7 m
C, Kg.m /s
C, Kg.m /s

2
2

4 θb=144o
4
3 θb=156o
3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
f, Hz f, Hz
(a) (b)

Figure 7. Radiation damping coefficient as a function of wave frequency at different floating states:
Figure 7. Radiation damping coefficient as a function of wave frequency at different floating states:
(a) for fixed beak angle at θb = 144°; and (b) for fixed depth of rotation axis at d = 5.5 m.
(a) for fixed beak angle at θb = 144◦ ; and (b) for fixed depth of rotation axis at d = 5.5 m.
7 7
x 10 x 10
5 5
d=4 m θb=108o
d=4.75 m
4 d=5.5 m 4 θb=120o
d=6.25 m θb=132o
3 d=7 m 3
θb=144o
M0 , N

M0 , N

2 2 θb=156o

1 1

0 0
 1 1

0 0
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
f, Hz f, Hz
(a) (b)

EnergiesFigure 7. 289
2017, 10, Radiation damping coefficient as a function of wave frequency at different floating states:
9 of 19
(a) for fixed beak angle at θb = 144°; and (b) for fixed depth of rotation axis at d = 5.5 m.

7 7
x 10 x 10
5 5
d=4 m θb=108o
d=4.75 m
4 d=5.5 m 4 θb=120o
d=6.25 m θb=132o
3 d=7 m 3
θb=144o
M0 , N

M0 , N
2 2 θb=156o

1 1

0 0
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
f, Hz f, Hz
(a) (b)

Figure 8. Excitation moment coefficient as a function of wave frequency at different floating states:
Figure 8. Excitation moment coefficient as a function of wave frequency at different floating states:
(a) for fixed beak angle at θb = 144°; and (b) for fixed depth of rotation axis at d = 5.5 m.
(a) for fixed beak angle at θb = 144◦ ; and (b) for fixed depth of rotation axis at d = 5.5 m.

4.2. Maximum Relative Capture Width

4.2. Maximum Relative Capture Width
According to Equation (14), the maximum relative capture width of the solo Duck WEC is
According to Equation (14), the maximum relative capture width of the solo Duck WEC is
obtained when:
obtained when:
K r (=J +
(J + 2 2
Kr = Je )Jω
e
)ω (17)
(17)
and:
and:
Ce = C (18)
Ce = C (18)
That means the Duck WEC works at resonance and the PTO damping is optimal, i.e., the Duck is
underThat means
the phase theamplitude
and Duck WEC worksalso
control, at resonance and the
called complex PTO damping
conjugate is optimal,
control [19]. i.e.,
Then, the the Duck
maximum
is under the phase and amplitude
relative capture width is obtained as: control, also called complex conjugate control [19]. Then, the
maximum relative capture width is obtained as:
M02 ω 1
ηmax = (19)
2ρg2 WC tanh(kh) 1 +
h i
2kh
sinh(2kh)

As shown in Equation (19), when neglecting the second fraction of the right term representing the
influence of water depth, the maximum relative capture width at certain frequency is determined only
by excitation moment and radiation damping coefficient, but not by the added inertia. In addition,
the reader may find that M0 , which represents the diffracting term, in Equation (19) does not appear
in Equation (1), which is also an expression for the maximum efficiency and only radiation terms
are included. Actually, the two equations are consistent as both of them have two arguments that are
directly related to the geometry of the Duck. More thoroughly, the radiation term can be related to the
diffracting term [27] by:
Z 2π
1
C= M0 *(θ) M0 (θ)dθ (20)
8λPincident 0
where λ is the wavelength of incident wave; and θ is the direction angle of the incident wave. Therefore,
M0 and C are just the synthetic reflection of A+ and A− , and Equations (1) and (19) should present the
same results.
Figure 9 shows the maximum relative capture width as a function of wave frequency at different
floating states. For both subfigures, an overall decreasing trend of the maximum relative capture
width with frequency is observed. Small rise and fall of the maximum relative capture width in the
frequency range and the resulted local maxima and minima are also detected. The larger the depth
of rotation axis and beak angle, the more prominent the fluctuation amplitudes appears. For most
of the wave frequencies studied in this paper, the maximum relative capture width exceeds one,
which is the limitation for a spine based Duck WEC and its hydrodynamic performance is dominated
different floating states. For both subfigures, an overall decreasing trend of the maximum relative
capture width with frequency is observed. Small rise and fall of the maximum relative capture
width in the frequency range and the resulted local maxima and minima are also detected. The
larger the depth of rotation axis and beak angle, the more prominent the fluctuation amplitudes
appears.
Energies For
2017, most of the wave frequencies studied in this paper, the maximum relative capture
10, 289 10 of 19
width exceeds one, which is the limitation for a spine based Duck WEC and its hydrodynamic
performance is dominated by the 2D property. This indicates that the solo Duck WEC effectively
by
usesthethe
2Dpoint
property. This indicates
absorber that the solo
effect to improve Duck WEC
its power effectively
capture ability. uses the point
Therefore, theabsorber
solo Duckeffect
WEC to
improve its power capture ability. Therefore, the solo Duck WEC will have better efficiency
will have better efficiency advantage than its spine based counterpart. Another interesting finding advantage
than itsthe
is that spine based counterpart.
maximum Another
relative capture tendsinteresting finding
to converge is that
at small wavethefrequency.
maximumThis relative
maycapture
be due
tends to converge at small wave frequency. This may be due to that the attitude differences
to that the attitude differences between these floating states are relatively small compared to the between
these
large floating
wavelength states
atare
lowrelatively small compared to the large wavelength at low frequencies.
frequencies.

3 3
d=4 m θb=108o
2.5 d=4.75 m 2.5
d=5.5 m θb=120o
d=6.25 m θb=132o
2 2
d=7 m
θb=144o
ηmax

ηmax
1.5 1.5
θb=156o
1 1

0.5 0.5

0 0
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
f, Hz f, Hz
(a) (b)

Figure 9. Maximum relative capture width as a function of wave frequency at different floating states:
Figure 9. Maximum relative capture width as a function of wave frequency at different floating states:
(a) for fixed beak angle at θb = 144°; and (b) for fixed depth of rotation axis at d = 5.5 m.
(a) for fixed beak angle at θb = 144◦ ; and (b) for fixed depth of rotation axis at d = 5.5 m.

In Figure 9, the maximum relative capture width is achieved by applying the complex
In Figure
conjugate 9, the
control. maximum
However, relative
several capture
studies [28–30]width is achieved
have revealed that by applying
it should the complex
be careful that a
conjugate control. However, several studies [28–30] have revealed that it should be
complex conjugate control applied to a point absorber in long waves may result in large motioncareful that
aexcursion,
complex conjugate
which maycontrol applied to
be unsuitable duea point absorber
to both inand
physical longlinear
waves maytheory
wave result in large motion
limitations. The
excursion, which may be unsuitable due to both physical and linear wave theory limitations.
The response amplitude operator (RAO) of the solo Duck at the maximum relative capture width can
be determined from Equations (10), (17) and (18) as:

M0
ξ0max = (21)
2ωC
Figure 10 shows the RAO of the Duck at maximum relative capture width as a function of wave
frequency at different floating states. The RAO decreases with wave frequency monotonously in the
whole frequency range, and it is more sensitive to the variation of beak angle than that of depth of
rotation axis. In long waves, the RAO is quite large. However, the RAO decreased a lot when the beak
angle increases. This inspired us that in order to make the complex conjugate control more credible
and feasible, the beak angle should be adjusted to as large value as possible. When considering the
optimal floating state in tide, we decide that the beak angle should be adjusted large enough until
only 2 m freeboard height left above the free surface at every tidal height. The resulting beak angles in
different tidal heights corresponding to different rotation axis depths are listed in Table 2, where dT is
the tidal height.

Table 2. Value of beak angle at different tidal heights.

dT , m −1.5 −0.75 0 0.75 1.5

d, m 4 4.75 5.5 6.25 7
θb , deg 162.0 155.4 150.3 144.9 139.2
when the beak angle increases. This inspired us that in order to make the complex conjugate control
more credible and feasible, the beak angle should be adjusted to as large value as possible. When
considering the optimal floating state in tide, we decide that the beak angle should be adjusted
large enough until only 2 m freeboard height left above the free surface at every tidal height. The
resulting
Energies 2017,beak angles in different tidal heights corresponding to different rotation axis depths
10, 289 11 ofare
19
listed in Table 2, where dT is the tidal height.

20 20
d=4 m θb=108o
d=4.75 m
d=5.5 m θb=120o
15 15
d=6.25 m
θb=132o

ξ0max, rad/m
d=7 m
ξ0max, rad/m

θb=144o
10 10
θb=156o

5 5

0 0
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
f, Hz f, Hz
(a) (b)

Figure 10.
Figure 10. Response
Response amplitude
amplitude operator
operator(RAO)(RAO)ofofthe
theDuck
Duckatatmaximum
maximumrelative
relativecapture
capturewidth
widthasasa
function of wave frequency at different floating states: (a) for fixed beak angle at θ
a function of wave frequency at different floating states: (a) for fixed beak angle at θb = 144◦ ; and
b = 144°;
and (b)
(b)
for fixed
for fixed depth
depth of
of rotation
rotation axis
axis at
at dd == 5.5
5.5 m.
m.

Table 2. Value of beak angle at different tidal heights.

4.3. Hydrostatic Stiffness Coefficient
dT, m −1.5 −0.75 0 0.75 1.5
The hydrostatic stiffness coefficient of the Duck also depends on the floating state, and it can be
d, m 4 4.75 5.5 6.25 7
divided into two parts: the pressure moment coefficient K and the gravity moment coefficient KG .
θb, deg 162.0 155.4 150.3 P144.9 139.2
The pressure moment of the Duck applied by the water at the rotation axis can be calculated by:
4.3. Hydrostatic Stiffness Coefficient x
MP = ρg zn × rdS (22)
The hydrostatic stiffness coefficient of the Duck
Sb also depends on the floating state, and it can
be divided into two parts: the pressure moment coefficient KP and the gravity moment coefficient
KG. TheSpressure
where b is the wetted
moment of the nDuck
surface; is the outward
applied normal
by the watervector
at theon the wetted
rotation surface;
axis can and r is by:
be calculated the
vector from the point on the wetted surface to the rotation axis O. The pressure moment coefficient can
be calculated as [31]: M P = ρ g òò z n ´ r d S
x (22)
K P = ρg x2 n3 dS + ρgv(zb + d)
S b
(23)
Sb
where Sb is the wetted surface; n is the outward normal vector on the wetted surface; and r is the
vector nfrom
where the z-component
3 is the point on the wetted surface vector
of the normal to the n;
rotation axis
zb is the O. The pressure
z-component moment
coordinate of coefficient
buoyancy
can be calculated as [31]:
center; and v is the volume of water displaced by the Duck. Figure 11 shows the pressure moment
and pressure moment coefficient as a function of 2depth of rotation axis and beak angle. The pressure
K P = ρ g òò x n 3 d S + ρ gv( z b + d )
moment increases with both depth of rotation (23)
axis and beak angle. An intuitional explanation is that
S b

the submerged volume increases with depth of rotation axis and beak angle, and then resulted in
where
the n3 is theand
buoyancy z-component of the normal
buoyancy moment vectorActually,
increasing. n; zb is the
thez-component coordinate
pressure moment of buoyancy
coefficient can be
center; and
deduced fromv isthe
thepressure
volumemoment
of waterfrom
displaced by the by:
its definition Duck. Figure 11 shows the pressure moment

dMP
KP = (24)
dθb

From Figure 11a, it can be seen that in both sides of the pressure moment MP = 0.9 × 108 N·m,
the contour lines are sparser and sparser, causing the pressure moment coefficient to have opposite
variation trend around the floating states with MP = 0.9 × 108 N·m and it is obviously shown in
Figure 11b.
 KP = (24)
dθb

From Figure 11a, it can be seen that in both sides of the pressure moment MP = 0.9 × 108 N·m,
the contour lines are sparser and sparser, causing the pressure moment coefficient to have opposite
variation trend around the floating states with MP = 0.9 × 108 N·m and it is obviously shown in
Energies 2017, 10, 289 12 of 19
Figure 11b.

0.9 1.1 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.4 1 010.8..6

0 1 1.4 2
150 .7 0.8
1.1 150 1.6 1.6
0.6 0.9 1 1.2 1.4
0.7 1.6
0.8 0.9 1 1.2 1.4
0.
140 5 0.6 0.7 140
0.8 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
0.4 0.5

θb, deg
θb, deg

0.6 0.7
0.8 1
130 0.5 0.6 130 0.
0.4 6
0.3 0.8 1
0.4 0.5
0.6
120 0.3 120
0.4 0.8
0.4
0.2 0.3 0.6
110 0.3 110
4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7
d, m d, m
(a) (b)

Figure 11. Pressure moment and pressure moment coefficient as a function of depth of rotation axis
Figure 11. Pressure moment and pressure moment coefficient as a function of depth of rotation axis and
and beak angle: (a) pressure moment MP/108 N·m; and (b) pressure moment coefficient KP/108
beak angle: (a) pressure moment MP /108 N·m; and (b) pressure moment coefficient KP /108 N·m·rad−1 .
N·m·rad−1.
At equilibrium position, the Duck is balanced when the pressure moment equals the gravity
At equilibrium position, the Duck is balanced when the pressure moment equals the gravity
moment as:
moment as:
MP − mgL cos(π − α) = 0 (25)
M P - mgL cos(π - α) = 0 (25)
where m is the rotating mass of the Duck. Then, the gravity moment coefficient can be deduced as:
where m is the rotating mass of the Duck. Then, the gravity moment coefficient can be deduced as:
d(−mgL cos(π − α))
KG = d(-mgL = −mgL sin α = MP tan α (26)
KG = dαcos(π - α)) = -mgL sin α = M tan α (26)
P
dα
Hence, the gravity moment coefficient only depends on the pressure moment, i.e., the floating
state,Hence,
and thethe gravity
angle moment
of gravity coefficient
center only depends
of the rotating mass. Inonorder
the pressure moment,
for the Duck to bei.e.,
ablethe
to floating
balance
state, and the angle of gravity center of the rotating mass. In order for the Duck
with the pressure moment, α should be between π/2 and 3π/2. Thus, the gravity moment coefficient to be able to balance
with thefrom
ranges pressure
–∞ tomoment,
+∞. Thatαmeans
shoulditbe is between
possible toπ/2adjust
and 3π/2. Thus, the gravity
the hydrostatic moment
stiffness coefficient
coefficient to any
ranges from –∞ to +∞. That means it is possible to adjust the hydrostatic stiffness
desired value so that Equation (17) be satisfied and complex conjugate control be realized to maximize coefficient to any
desired value so that Equation (17) be satisfied and complex conjugate control
power capture. Therefore, at different tidal heights, the variation of hydrodynamic coefficients can be realized to
maximize
be followedpower
by thecapture.
adjustmentTherefore, at different
of hydrostatic stiffnesstidal heights, the
by changing the variation
angle of massof hydrodynamic
center so that
the reactance of the system impedance keep zero. Then, the WEC system will have the
coefficients can be followed by the adjustment of hydrostatic stiffness by changing the angle
optimalof
mass center so
performance in that
tide. the reactance
Since of themoment
the pressure system coefficient
impedanceincrease
keep zero.
withThen, the WEC
both depth system axis
of rotation will
have the optimal performance in tide. Since the pressure moment coefficient
and beak angle, the gravity moment coefficient will be more sensitive to the angle variance of gravityincrease with both
depth of
center of the
rotation axismass
rotating and at
beak
largeangle,
depth theofgravity
rotationmoment
axis andcoefficient
beak angle.will be more sensitive to the
angle variance of gravity center of the rotating mass at large depth of rotation axis and beak angle.
4.4. Case Study
4.4. Case Study
As a summation of the studies in above sections, we have firstly investigated the character of
As a summation
the hydrodynamic of the studies
coefficients in above relative
and maximum sections,capture
we have firstly
width of ainvestigated
solo Duck WEC the character of
at different
the hydrodynamic
floating states, and we coefficients and maximum
make the complex conjugate relative
controlcapture widthbyofadjusting
more credible a solo Duck WEC
the beak at
angle
to as large a value as possible so that the RAO will be reasonably small. Then, we proposed to realize
the complex conjugate control by adjusting the angle of gravity center of the rotating mass of the Duck
to cancel the reactance term of the mechanical impedance in different tidal heights. In this section,
we apply the movable mass method to achieve complex conjugate control for a solo Duck WEC when
exposed to tide by a case study.
For simplicity of engineering realization, the movable mass is better located inside the profile of
the Duck. In this section, the movable mass is only free to move in the x-z plane as the movement in
the y direction is meaningless to adjusting the hydrostatic stiffness coefficient and gravity moment.
Supposing that the movable mass takes part of the total rotating mass, denoted as bm, where b is
the mass ratio, and the movable mass is assumed to focus at one point to ease the calculation for
its inertia. The designed floating state is selected as that listed in Table 2 when the tidal height is 0,
Energies 2017, 10, 289 13 of 19

and the designed position of the movable mass is where the movable mass resides at the designed
floating states. In order for the Duck to balance and resonate at the designed floating state, according
to Equations (17), (25), and (26), it satisfies that:

Md + (1 − b)mgL0 cos α0 + bmgLd cos αd = 0 (27)

Kd − mg[(1 − b) L0 sin α0 + bLd sin αd ] = ( Jd + J0 + bmL2d )ω2 (28)

where Md and Kd are the pressure moment and pressure moment coefficient at the designed floating
state, respectively; Ld and αd are the radial distance and angle of the designed position of the movable
mass, respectively; Jd is the added inertia at the designed floating state; L0 and α0 are the radial distance
and angle of the gravity center of remained rotating mass, respectively; and J0 is the inertia of the
remained rotating mass added with the converted inertia from the PTO load. At certain tidal height,
in order for the Duck to balance and resonate at the corresponding floating state, it should satisfy that:

Mn + (1 − b)mgL0 cos(α0 + β) + bmgLn cos(αn + β) = 0 (29)

Kn − mg[(1 − b) L0 sin(α0 + β) + bLn sin(αn + β)] = ( Jn + J0 + bmL2n )ω2 (30)

where Mn and Kn are the pressure moment and pressure moment coefficient at this floating state,
respectively; Ln and αn are the radial distance and angle of the position of the movable mass at
this floating state, respectively; Jn is the added inertia at this floating state; and β is the beak angle
differences between this floating state and the designed floating state. From Equations (27)–(30),
the following relations are derived:

Mn − Md = −(1 − b)mgL0 [cos(α0 + β) − cos α0 ] − bmg[ Ln cos(αn + β) − Ld cos αd ] (31)

Kn − Kd − mg{(1 − b) L0 [sin(α0 + β) − sin α0 ] + b[ Ln sin(αn + β) − Ld sin αd ]}

(32)
= [ Jn − Jd + bm( L2n − L2d )]ω2
To find the solution of αn and Ln , Equations (31) and (32) can be rearranged as:

Mn − Md + (1 − b)mgL0 [cos(α0 + β) − cos α0 ] − bmgLd cos αd

Ln = − (33)
bmg cos(αn + β)

Fn =Kn − Kd − mg{(1 − b) L0 [sin(α0 + β) − sin α0 ] + b[ Ln sin(αn + β) − Ld sin αd ]}

(34)
−[ Jn − Jd + bm( L2n − L2d )]ω2
Then, αn is traversed through all the value from −π to π to find the corresponding Ln and Fn .
One example of the variation of Ln and Fn with αn is shown in Figure 12, where Llim is the radial
distance from the Duck surface to the rotation axis. Since the movable mass should be inside the Duck
profile, the solution for Ln should be below the curve of Llim . Then, the solution is found where Fn
equals zero, and 0 < Ln < Llim . In all the calculations in this section, we assume the radial distance and
angle of the remained rotating mass center to be constant, and they are set to L0 = 2.5 m and α0 = 135◦ .
Figure 13a shows the position of the movable mass variation with tidal height at different wave
frequencies at Ld = 2.5 m, αd = 135◦ and b = 0.2. The movable mass finds its position inside Duck
profile in the whole tidal range indicating that the movable mass method is able to make the Duck
WEC work at resonance at every tidal height for different wave frequencies in the finite space inside
the Duck profile. Figure 13b shows the position of the movable mass variation with tidal height
at different mass ratios at Ld = 2.5 m, αd = 135◦ and f = 0.1 Hz. For the same variation of tidal
height, the displacement of the movable mass decreases with mass ratio. At b = 0.3, the five positions
of the movable mass corresponds to the five tidal heights listed in Table 2 are relatively compact.
However, at b = 0.1, it is even not possible to find a place inside the Duck for the movable mass at tidal
 Ln
Llim

Energies 2017, 10, 289 13 of 18

Energies 2017, 10,0289 14 of 19

Duck profile, the solution for Ln should be below the curve of Llim. Then, the solution is found where
solution
Fn equals zero, and 0 < Ln < Llim. In all the calculations in this section, we assume the radial distance
height dT =of−the
and angle m and dT rotating
1.5 remained = 1.5 m mass
to achieve
centerresonance. Hence,
to be constant, andthe efficiency
they are set toofLthe Duck
0 = 2.5 in tidal
m and α0 =
range
135°. of 3 m will be reduced.

50
-50 7
-150 -100 -50 0 50 100 Fn/10
150
αn, deg
Ln

Figure 12. One example of the variation of Ln and Fn with αn.Llim

Figure 13a shows the position of the movable mass variation with tidal height at different
wave frequencies
0 at Ld = 2.5 m, αd = 135° and b = 0.2. The movable mass finds its position inside
Duck profile in the whole tidal range indicating that the movable mass method solution
is able to make the
Duck WEC work at resonance at every tidal height for different wave frequencies in the finite space
inside the Duck profile. Figure 13b shows the position of the movable mass variation with tidal
height at different mass ratios at Ld = 2.5 m, αd = 135° and f = 0.1 Hz. For the same variation of tidal
height, the displacement of the movable mass decreases with mass ratio. At b = 0.3, the five
positions of -50
the movable mass corresponds to the five tidal heights listed in Table 2 are relatively
-150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150
compact. However, at b = 0.1, it is even not possible to find a place inside the Duck for the movable
αn, deg
mass at tidal height dT = −1.5 m and dT = 1.5 m to achieve resonance. Hence, the efficiency of the
Figure
Duck in tidal range of 3Figure
m will 12.
12.be One exampleof
reduced.
One example ofthe
thevariation
variationof
ofLLn and
and FFn with
with ααn..
n n n

Figure8 13a shows the position of the movable mass 8 variation with tidal height at different
wave frequencies at f L
=0.06
d =Hz2.5 m, α d = 135° and b = 0.2. The movable
b=0.1 mass finds its position inside
6 =0.10 Hztidal range indicating that the 6 b=0.2
Duck profile in thef whole movable mass method is able to make the
f =0.16 Hz b=0.3
Duck WEC4 work at resonance at every tidal
dT=-1.5 m height for4different wave frequencies in the
dT=-1.5 m finite space
Designed position Designed position
inside the Duck profile. Figure 13b shows the position 2
of the movable mass variation with tidal
2
z, m
z, m

height at different mass ratios at Ld = 2.5 m, αd = 135° and f = 0.1 Hz. For the same variation of tidal
height, the0 displacement of the movable O 0
mass decreases with mass ratio. At O b = 0.3, the five
positions -2
of the movable mass corresponds to the five -2 tidal heights listed in Table 2 are relatively
dT=1.5 m dT=1.5 m
compact. However, at b = 0.1, it is even not possible to find a place inside the Duck for the movable
-4 -4
mass at tidal height dT = −1.5 m and dT = 1.5 m to achieve resonance. Hence, the efficiency of the
-10 -5 0 5
Duck in tidal-10
range of 3 -5m willx, m
0
be reduced. 5
x, m
(a) (b)
8 8
Figure
Figure 13.
13. Position
Position of
of the
f =0.06 Hz movable
the movable mass
mass variation
variation with
with tidal
tidal height
heightbat=0.1
at different
different wave
wave frequencies
frequencies and
and
6 f =0.10 Hz 6 b◦=0.2
mass ratios: (a) for different wave frequencies at Ld = 2.5 m, αd = 135°,
mass ratios: (a) for different wave frequencies at Ld = 2.5 m, αd = 135b=0.3 , and b = 0.2; and (b)for
and b = 0.2; and (b) fordifferent
different
f =0.16 Hz
mass
mass ratios
4
ratios at LLd ==2.5
at 2.5m,m,ααd ==135°,
135◦and
, andf =f 0.1 Hz.
= 0.1 Hz. 4 d =-1.5 m
d
Designed positiond dT=-1.5 m Designed position T

2 2
z, m
z, m

Figure 14a shows the position of the movable mass variation with tidal height at different
Figure 14a shows the position of the movable mass variation with tidal height at different radial
radial distance
0 of the designed position O at αd = 135°, b0 = 0.2, and f = 0.1 Hz. Slight O increase in the
distance of the designed position at αd = 135◦ , b = 0.2, and f = 0.1 Hz. Slight increase in the displacement
displacement-2
of the movable mass corresponding to the -2
same tidal height variation for larger radial
of the movable mass corresponding tomthe same tidal height
dT=1.5 variation for larger radial
dT=1.5 m distance of the
designed position
-4 has been observed. When approaching -4 the beak part of the Duck, smaller room will
be left for the movable mass to locate. At Ld = 7.5 m, there-10 will be no position
-5
inside
0
the Duck
5
for the
-10 -5 0 5
movable mass to locate to make x, m the Duck WEC resonate when dT = −1.5 m. Figure 14b shows the
x, m
position of the movable mass (a) variation with tidal height at different angles (b) of the designed position
at Ld Figure 13.bPosition
= 2.5 m, = 0.2, and f =movable
of the 0.1 Hz.mass
In addition,
variation small increase
with tidal heightinatthe displacement
different of the movable
wave frequencies and
massmass
corresponding
ratios: (a) for different wave frequencies at Ld = 2.5 m, αd = 135°, and b = 0.2; and (b) for different is
to the same tidal height variation for larger angle of the designed position
noticed.
mass ratios atthe
Nearer Ld =boundary of theand
2.5 m, αd = 135°, Duck profile
f = 0.1 Hz. of the designed position, smaller rooms will be
left for the movable mass to locate. At αd = 165◦ , the movable mass is about to touch the boundary
dT = 1.5
whenFigure 14am.shows
From the theabove
positionanalysis,
of thethe best designed
movable position with
mass variation should be locate
tidal heightatatthe center
different
of the Duck profile so that the displacement of the movable mass will be smaller
radial distance of the designed position at αd = 135°, b = 0.2, and f = 0.1 Hz. Slight increase in the and there will be
enough room for
displacement themovable
of the movablemass mass corresponding
to locate for thetowhole
the sametidaltidal
range.
height variation for larger radial
displacement of the movable mass corresponding to the same tidal height variation for larger angle
of the designed position is noticed. Nearer the boundary of the Duck profile of the designed
position, smaller rooms will be left for the movable mass to locate. At αd = 165°, the movable mass is
about to touch the boundary when dT = 1.5 m. From the above analysis, the best designed position
should be locate at the center of the Duck profile so that the displacement of the movable mass will
Energies 2017, 10, 289 15 of 19
be smaller and there will be enough room for the movable mass to locate for the whole tidal range.

8 8

6 6

4 Designed position 4
dT=-1.5 m Designed position dT=-1.5 m
2 2

z, m
z, m

0 O 0 αd =105o O
Ld=2.5 m
-2 -2 o
Ld=5.0 m dT=1.5 m αd =135 dT=1.5 m

-4 Ld=7.5 m -4 αd =165o

-10 -5 0 5 -10 -5 0 5
x, m x, m
(a) (b)

Figure 14.
Figure 14. Position
Position ofof the
the movable
movable mass
mass variation
variation with
with tidal
tidal height
height at
at different
different wavewave frequencies
frequencies and
and
mass ratios:
mass ratios:(a)
(a)for
fordifferent
different radial
radial distance
distance of the
of the designed
designed position
position at αdat= α135
d = ◦135°, b = 0.2, and f = 0.1
, b = 0.2, and f = 0.1 Hz;
Hz; and (b) for different angle of the designed position at Ld = 2.5 m, b = 0.2, and f = 0.1 Hz.
and (b) for different angle of the designed position at Ld = 2.5 m, b = 0.2, and f = 0.1 Hz.

From an engineering view, the heavier the movable mass, the more expensive the cost is. The
From an engineering view, the heavier the movable mass, the more expensive the cost is.
weight of the movable mass can be calculated as:
The weight of the movable mass can be calculated as:
Md
Gm = bmg = Md
æ cos α ö
Gm = bmg = çç11 - 1 + L
Ldd cos αd d ÷
(35)
(35)
−- ÷÷÷

cosαα
L0L0cos 0 çbb
0 ç − 1 +
è L
L 0
0
cos
cos αα0 0ø

As
As can
can be
be seen,
seen, the
the weight
weight ofof the
the movable
movable mass
mass increases
increases with
with mass ratio b,
mass ratio b, and
and decreases
decreases with
with
LLdd and
and cosαd. In order to apply a light-weight movable mass, the mass ratio should be as small as
cosα . In order to apply a light-weight movable mass, the mass ratio should be as small as
possible,
possible, and
and aa maximum
maximum value of LLddcosα
value of inside the
cosαd inside the Duck
Duck profile
profile suggests
suggests that
that the
the best
best designed
designed
position
position should
shouldreside
resideononthe paunch
the paunch surface. However,
surface. However,the the
above studies
above find that
studies find the
thatmovable mass
the movable
will not be able to stay inside the Duck in the whole tidal range if the mass ratio is too
mass will not be able to stay inside the Duck in the whole tidal range if the mass ratio is too small small and the
designed position locates
and the designed positionnear the Duck
locates profile
near the Duckboundary. Thus, to find
profile boundary. the to
Thus, lowest
find weight, we weight,
the lowest should
solve the optimization
we should problem under
solve the optimization constraints
problem stated as below:
under constraints stated as below:
min GGmm
min
(36)
(36)
subject to
subject αnn )) <
to LLnn((α <LLlimlim
(α(α
n )n ) for dfor ∈1.5,
T ∈dT[− [ − 1.5,
1.51.5]
]

From above
From above studies,
studies, we
we found
found that
that the
the trajectory
trajectory ofof the
the movable
movable mass
mass varies
varies continuously
continuously withwith
tidal height. Therefore, we believe that provided the position of the movable mass
tidal height. Therefore, we believe that provided the position of the movable mass for the five tidalfor the five tidal
heights listed in Table 2 resides inside the Duck profile, the movable mass will always
heights listed in Table 2 resides inside the Duck profile, the movable mass will always reside inside the reside inside
the Duck
Duck profile
profile forwhole
for the the whole
tidal tidal
range.range.
FigureFigure 15 shows
15 shows the distribution
the distribution of theof the lowest
lowest movable movable
mass
weight and corresponding mass ratio at different designed positions. In Figure 15a, the deep deep
mass weight and corresponding mass ratio at different designed positions. In Figure 15a, the blue
blue region
region represents
represents the suitable
the most most suitable place
place for thefor the designed
designed position,
position, and it resides
and it resides at thearea
at the center center
of
area of the Duck profile, which confirms the previous conclusion that the designed
the Duck profile, which confirms the previous conclusion that the designed position should be kept position should
be kept
away fromaway
the from the boundary.
boundary. In Figure
In Figure 15b, 15b,ratio
the mass the mass ratioinisthe
is smaller smaller
upperinarea
theof upper area of
the Duck, the
while
larger at the lower area. The blank area inside the Duck profile means that there will be no solution
for Equations (29) and (30) at these regions. We found the minimum value of mass ratio to be 0.125
indicating that at least 12.5% of the rotating mass should be arranged to make the movable mass be
adequate to realize complex conjugate control for the whole tidal range.
Energies 2017, 10, 289 15 of 18

Duck, while larger at the lower area. The blank area inside the Duck profile means that there will be
no solution for Equations (29) and (30) at these regions. We found the minimum value of mass ratio
to be 0.125
Energies indicating
2017, 10, 289 that at least 12.5% of the rotating mass should be arranged to make the
16 of 19
movable mass be adequate to realize complex conjugate control for the whole tidal range.

7
x 10

5 0.8
2.5
5
0.6

z, m
2
z, m

0
0 1.5 0.4

1 0.2
-5 -5
-10 -5 0 5 -10 -5 0 5
x, m x, m
(a) (b)

Figure
Figure 15.
15. Distribution
Distributionof ofthe
thelowest
lowestmovable
movablemass
massweight
weightand
andcorresponding
correspondingmass
massratio
ratioat
atdifferent
different
designed positions: (a) lowest movable mass weight; and (b) corresponding mass ratio.
designed positions: (a) lowest movable mass weight; and (b) corresponding mass ratio.

5. Conclusions
5. Conclusions
This paper studied the influence of tidal height to the hydrodynamic performance of a solo
This paper studied the influence of tidal height to the hydrodynamic performance of a solo Duck
Duck wave energy converter with fixed pitching axis in regular wave. A movable mass method is
wave energy converter with fixed pitching axis in regular wave. A movable mass method is utilized
utilized in the whole tidal range to not only balance the Duck to appropriate beak angle, but also
in the whole tidal range to not only balance the Duck to appropriate beak angle, but also follow the
follow the hydrodynamic coefficient variation to keep cancelling the reactance of the WEC system
hydrodynamic coefficient variation to keep cancelling the reactance of the WEC system impedance
impedance so that complex conjugate control can be realized to optimize the Duck WEC
so that complex conjugate control can be realized to optimize the Duck WEC performance in tide.
performance in tide. Some conclusions can be made from above studies:
Some conclusions can be made from above studies:
(1) The added inertia, radiation damping coefficient and excitation moment coefficient share
(1) similar
The added inertia,
variation lawradiation damping
with floating coefficient
states. and excitation
Furthermore, moment
the added coefficient
inertia share similar
can be qualitatively
variation law
estimated by the with floating
water states.
inertia, Furthermore,
which is definedthe as added inertialength
the mapped can beonqualitatively estimated
the Duck surface in
by the water inertia, which is defined as the mapped length
the normal direction of its velocity multiplied by square of its rotation radius. on the Duck surface in the normal
(2) In direction
most ofofthe its range
velocity of multiplied by square of
the wave frequency its rotation in
investigated radius.
this paper, the Duck WEC has a
(2) maximum
In most of the range of the wave frequency investigated
relative capture width larger than one, which is consistent in this with
paper,thethe
pointDuck WEC
absorber
has a maximum relative capture width larger than one, which is consistent
effect. The beak angle should be adjusted to as large a value as possible so that the RAO of the with the point
absorber
Duck effect. Therelative
at maximum beak angle should
capture be adjusted
width to as large small.
will be reasonably a value as possible so that the RAO
of the Duck at maximum relative capture width will be
(3) At certain floating state, the hydrostatic stiffness coefficient only depends reasonably small. on the angle of mass
(3) center.
At certain floating
Therefore, thestate, the of
position hydrostatic
the mass centerstiffnessis acoefficient
key parameteronly that
depends on balances
not only the anglethe of
mass center.
Duck to a largeTherefore, the position
beak angle, of the
but also mass the
adjusts center is a key of
reactance parameter
the systemthat not only complex
so that balances
the Duckcontrol
conjugate to a largecan beak angle, at
be realized but also adjusts
different the reactance of the system so that complex
tidal heights.
(4) In conjugate
order tocontrol
cancel canthe be realizedterm
reactance at different
from the tidal heights. impedance of the WEC system at
mechanical
(4) different
In order tidal heights, the movable mass ratio should notimpedance
to cancel the reactance term from the mechanical be too small, andWEC
of the the system
designed at
position
differentoftidal
theheights,
movablethe mass should
movable keep
mass away
ratio from
should notthebeDuck profile.
too small, andThe
the lowest
designed weight of
position
the movable
of the movable mass is found
mass shouldwhen keepits designed
away from the position locates at
Duck profile. thelowest
The centerweight
of the of
Duck profile.
the movable
mass is found when its designed position locates at the center of the Duck profile.
Acknowledgments: The research was supported by the Chinese Scholarship Council (CSC) and the Swedish
Research Council (VR)
Acknowledgments: Grant
The 2015-04657.
research was supported by the Chinese Scholarship Council (CSC) and the Swedish
Research Council (VR) Grant 2015-04657.
Author Contributions: Jinming Wu performed the numerical simulation and prepared the manuscript.
Author Contributions:
Yingxue Jinming Wu
Yao and Malin Göteman performed
supervised the the
wave numerical simulation
power project, and prepared
commented the manuscript.
on the manuscript and
Yingxue Yaotoand
contributed Malin Göteman
the revisions. Wei Li supervised the wave
and Liang Zhou power on
commented project, commented on the manuscript and
the manuscript.
contributed to the revisions. Wei Li and Liang Zhou commented on the manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature
Energies 2017, 10, 289 17 of 19

Nomenclature
A0 Amplitude of the incident wave (m)
A+ Radiated wave amplitude at x → +∞ due to forced unit amplitude pitching velocity (m)
A− Radiated wave amplitude at x → −∞ due to forced unit amplitude pitching velocity (m)
 Complex amplitude of wave amplitude (m)
b Mass ratio
C Radiation damping coefficient in pitch direction due to pitch motion (N·m·s)
Ce PTO damping coefficient (N·m·s)
d Depth of rotation axis (m)
ds Length of the segment on the Duck surface (m)
dT Tidal height (m)
Emax Maximum efficiency
G Gravity center of the rotating mass
Gm Weight of the movable mass (N)
g Acceleration of gravity (m/s2 )
h Water depth (m)
J Added inertia in pitch direction due to pitch motion (Kg·m2 )
J0 Inertia of the remained rotating mass added with the converted inertia from the PTO load (Kg·m2 )
Jd Added inertia at the designed floating state (Kg·m2 )
Je Dry inertia in pitch direction (Kg·m2 )
Jn Added inertia at current floating state (Kg·m2 )
Jw Water inertia (m3 )
Kd Pressure moment coefficient at the designed floating state (N·m)
KG Gravity moment coefficient (N·m)
Kn Pressure moment coefficient at this floating state (N·m)
KP Pressure moment coefficient (N·m)
Kr Hydrostatic stiffness coefficient in pitch direction due to pitch motion (N·m)
k Wave number
L Radial distance of the gravity center of the rotating mass (m)
L0 Radial distance of the gravity center of remained rotating mass (m)
Ld Radial distance of the designed position of the movable mass (m)
Llim Radial distance from the Duck surface to the rotation axis (m)
Ln Radial distance of the position of the movable mass at current floating state (m)
l Rotation radius of the small segment on the Duck surface (m)
M0 Modulus of complex amplitude of excitation moment per unit wave amplitude (N)
Md Pressure moment at the designed floating state (N·m)
MG Gravity moment (N·m)
Mn Pressure moment at this floating state (N·m)
MP Pressure moment (N·m)
M̂ Complex amplitude of excitation moment in pitch direction (N·m)
n Outward normal vector on the wetted surface
n3 z-component of the normal vector n
O Rotation axis
R Radius of the stern part (m)
r Vector from the point on the wetted surface to the rotation axis O
v Volume of water displaced by the Duck (m3 )
W Width of the Duck (m)
x Component of a Cartesian coordinate system in wave propagating direction
y Component of a Cartesian coordinate system in longitudinal direction of the Duck
Z Radiation impedance (N·m·s)
Zs Mechanical impedance (N·m·s)
z Component of a Cartesian coordinate system in the opposite direction of gravity
zb z-component coordinate of buoyancy center (m)
α Angle of the gravity center of rotating mass (◦ )
αd Angle of the designed position of the movable mass (◦ )
Energies 2017, 10, 289 18 of 19

α0 Angle of the gravity center of remained rotating mass (◦ )

αn Angle of the position of the movable mass at this floating state (◦ )
β Beak angle differences between this floating state and the designed floating state (◦ )
γ Angle between the normal vector of the segment and its velocity direction (◦ )
η Relative capture width
ηmax Maximum relative capture width
θ Direction angle of the incident wave (◦ )
θb Beak angle (◦ )
ξ Pitch excursion (rad)
ξ0 Modulus of complex amplitude of pitch excursion per unit wave amplitude (rad/m)
ξ0max RAO of the solo Duck at the maximum relative capture width (rad/m)
ξ̂ Complex amplitude of pitch excursion (rad)
.̂
ξ Complex amplitude of pitch velocity (rad/s)
..ˆ
ξ Complex amplitude of pitch excursion (rad/s2 )
ρ Density of water (kg/m3 )
φ Phase difference between the complex amplitude of pitch excursion and  (◦ )
ω Circular frequency of incident wave (rad/s)

References
1. Vicinanza, D.; Margheritini, L.; Kofoed, J.P.; Buccino, M. The SSG wave energy converter: Performance,
status and recent developments. Energies 2012, 5, 193–226. [CrossRef]
2. Iuppa, C.; Contestabile, P.; Cavallaro, L.; Foti, E.; Vicinanza, D. Hydraulic performance of an innovative
breakwater for overtopping wave energy conversion. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1226. [CrossRef]
3. Hansen, R.H.; Kramer, M.M.; Vidal, E. Discrete displacement hydraulic power take-off system for the
Wavestar wave energy converter. Energies 2013, 6, 4001–4044. [CrossRef]
4. Salter, S.H. Wave power. Nature 1974, 249, 720–724. [CrossRef]
5. Skyner, D. Solo Duck Linear Analysis; University of Edinburgh: Edinburgh, UK, 1987.
6. Salter, S.H. Apparatus and Method for Extracting Wave Energy. U.S. Patent 3,928,967, 30 December 1975.
7. Evans, D.V. A theory for wave-power absorption by oscillating bodies. J. Fluid Mech. 1976, 77, 1–25.
[CrossRef]
8. Mei, C.C. Power extraction from water waves. J. Ship Res. 1976, 20, 63–66.
9. Cruz, J. Ocean Wave Energy Current Status and Future Perspectives; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2008.
10. Pizer, D. Numerical Modeling of Wave Energy Absorbers; University of Edinburgh: Edinburgh, UK, 1994.
11. Mynett, A.E.; Serman, D.D.; Mei, C.C. Characteristics of Salter’s cam for extracting energy from ocean waves.
Appl. Ocean Res. 1979, 1, 13–20. [CrossRef]
12. Castellucci, V.; Garcia-Teran, J.; Eriksson, M.; Padman, L.; Waters, R. Influence of sea state and tidal height
on wave power absorption. IEEE J. Ocean. Eng. 2016, PP, 1–8. [CrossRef]
13. Castellucci, V.; Abrahamsson, J.; Kamf, T.; Waters, R. Nearshore tests of the tidal compensation system for
point-absorbing wave energy converter. Energies 2015, 8, 3272–3291. [CrossRef]
14. Castellucci, V.; Waters, R.; Eriksson, M.; Leijon, M. Tidal effect compensation system for point absorbing
wave energy converters. Renew. Energy 2013, 51, 247–251. [CrossRef]
15. Lucas, J.; Salter, S.H.; Cruz, J.; Taylor, J.R.M.; Bryden, I. Performance optimization of a modified Duck
through optimal mass distribution. In Proceedings of the 8th European Wave and Tidal Energy Conference,
Uppsala, Sweden, 7–9 September 2009.
16. Park, Y.H.; Suh, K.D. Variations of storm surge caused by shallow water depths and extreme tidal ranges.
Ocean Eng. 2012, 55, 44–51. [CrossRef]
17. Khan, D.; Watson, S.J.; Infield, D.G. Identifying the effect of tidal height on offshore wind speed profiles.
Wind Energy 2003, 6, 405–412. [CrossRef]
18. Masselink, G.; Short, A.D. The effect of tidal range on beach morphodynamics and morphology: A conceptual
beach model. J. Coast. Res. 1993, 9, 785–800.
19. Falnes, J. Ocean Waves and Oscillating Systems: Linear Interaction including Wave-Energy Extraction; Cambridge
University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2002.
Energies 2017, 10, 289 19 of 19

20. Li, Y.; Yu, Y.H. A synthesis of numerical methods for modeling wave energy converter-point absorbers.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 4352–4364. [CrossRef]
21. McCormick, M.E. Ocean Wave Energy Conversion; Dover Publications Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2007.
22. Price, A.A.E.; Dent, C.J.; Wallace, A.R. On the capture width of wave energy converters. Appl. Ocean Res.
2009, 31, 251–259. [CrossRef]
23. Lopes, M.F.P.; Hals, J.; Gomes, R.P.F.; Moan, T.; Gato, L.M.C.; Falcão, A. Experimental and numerical
investigation of non-predictive phase-control strategies for a point-absorbing wave energy converter.
Ocean Eng. 2009, 36, 386–402. [CrossRef]
24. Kara, F. Time domain prediction of power absorption from ocean waves with wave energy converter arrays.
Renew. Energy 2016, 92, 30–46. [CrossRef]
25. Ansys, Inc. AQWA Reference Manual, version 16.0; Ansys, Inc.: Canonsburg, PA, USA, 2015.
26. Salter, S.H. Progress on Edinburgh ducks. In Proceedings of the IUTAM Symposium on Hydrodynamics of
Ocean Wave Energy Utilization, Lisbon, Portugal, 8–11 July 1985.
27. Pizer, D. Numerical prediction of the performance of a solo Duck. In Proceedings of the 1993 European
Wave Energy Symposium, Edinburgh, UK, 21–24 July 1993; pp. 129–137.
28. Evans, D.V. Maximum wave-power absorption under motion constraints. Appl. Ocean Res. 1981, 3, 200–203.
[CrossRef]
29. Pizer, D.J. Maximum wave-power absorption of point absorbers under motion constraints. Appl. Ocean Res.
1993, 15, 227–234. [CrossRef]
30. Hals, J.; Falnes, J.; Moan, T. Constrained Optimal Control of a Heaving Buoy Wave-Energy Converter.
J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng. 2010, 133, 011401. [CrossRef]
31. Newman, J.N. Marin Hydrodynamics; Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Press: Cambridge, MA,
USA, 1977.

© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).