3.9 Article

Evaluation of the overset grid method for control studies of wave energy converters in OpenFOAM numerical wave tanks

期刊

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1007/s40722-019-00156-5

关键词

Mesh motion; Overset grids; Numerical wave tank; Energy maximising control; OpenFOAM

资金

  1. Science Foundation Ireland [13/IA/1886]
  2. Higher Education Excellence Program of the Ministry of Human Capacities
  3. Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) [13/IA/1886] Funding Source: Science Foundation Ireland (SFI)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD)-based numerical wave tanks are valuable tools for the development and evaluation of energy maximising control systems for wave energy converters (WECs). However, the exaggerated body motion amplitude, which can be induced by the energy maximising control system, challenges the commonly applied mesh morphing method in CFD, due to the resulting mesh distortion and subsequent numerical instability. A more advanced mesh motion method is the overset grid method, which can inherently handle large-amplitude body motions and has recently become freely available in the open-source CFD software OpenFOAM. The overset grid method can, therefore, potentially eliminate the mesh distortion problem, hindering the simulation of WECs under controlled conditions. To evaluate the capability of the overset grid method for control studies of WECs in an OpenFOAM numerical wave tank, this paper presents a detailed comparison of the overset grid and mesh morphing methods, considering five test cases of increasing complexity. The test cases range from a static equilibrium test to the modelling of a controlled WEC, and good agreement is demonstrated between the two mesh motion methods, except for the case of the controlled WEC, when the device motion becomes large, and the mesh morphing simulation crashes. The runtimes for overset grid simulations are observed to be approximately double the time required for the mesh morphing simulations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据