Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWard, SLen
dc.contributor.authorRobins, PEen
dc.contributor.authorLewis, MJen
dc.contributor.authorIglesias, Gen
dc.contributor.authorHashemi, MRen
dc.contributor.authorNeill, SPen
dc.date.accessioned2018-04-30T15:07:23Z
dc.date.available2018-04-30T15:07:23Z
dc.date.issued2018-06-15en
dc.identifier.issn0306-2619en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/11378
dc.description.abstract

© 2018 The Author(s) Characterisations of the tidal stream resource and its variability over various timescales are crucial for the development of the tidal stream energy industry. To date, no research has compared resource sensitivity in standing wave (when peak currents occur midway between high and low water) and progressive wave (where peak currents occur at high and low water) tidal systems. Here, we compare the flow regimes of standing wave versus progressive wave systems and the associated variations in tidal stream power with applications to device deployment options (floating-platform turbines versus bottom-mounted turbines). We use a validated 3D numerical model (ROMS) of a globally-significant tidal energy shelf sea region (Irish Sea), to test the hypotheses that the influence on potential extractable energy, and suitability for different devices, may be markedly different between these contrasting systems. Power density was also calculated and compared for floating versus bottom-mounted devices using in-situ current data (ADCPs) obtained from a standing wave site and a progressive wave site. We show that progressive wave systems are characterised by velocity-asymmetry over a tidal cycle (i.e. stronger peak flows at high water than at low water), leading to power-asymmetry. Such power asymmetry was shown to have more of an effect on floating device technology, where an assumed turbine depth tracks the sea surface, in contrast to bottom-mounted technology, where the hub height is fixed at a certain position above the sea bed. Shallow, high-flow regions where tidal range is large contained up to 2.5% more power density from bottom-mounted compared with floating turbines; however, there were areas where floating devices were exposed to higher mean currents over a tidal cycle. Standing wave systems, where flow asymmetry is minimised, did not particularly favour either technology. The results highlight the requirement for detailed resource assessments to consider the vertical plane, and are applicable to all potential tidal stream energy sites.

en
dc.format.extent274 - 285en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.titleTidal stream resource characterisation in progressive versus standing wave systemsen
dc.typeJournal Article
plymouth.volume220en
plymouth.journalApplied Energyen
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.03.059en
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Science and Engineering
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Marine Institute
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
dcterms.dateAccepted2018-03-22en
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot knownen
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.03.059en
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserveden
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2018-06-15en
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV