A comparison of two wave energy converters’ power performance and mooring fatigue characteristics – One WEC vs many WECs in a wave park with interaction effects

The production of renewable energy is key to satisfying the increasing demand for energy without further increasing pollution. Harnessing ocean energy from waves has attracted attention due to its high energy density. This study compares two generations of floating heaving point absorber WEC, WaveEL 3.0 and WaveEL 4.0, regarding their power performance and mooring line fatigue characteristics, which are essential in, e.g., LCoE calculations. The main differences between the two WECs are the principal dimensions and minor differences in their geometries. The DNV software SESAM was used for simulations and analyses of these WECs in terms of buoy heave motion resonances for maximising energy harvesting, motion characteristics, mooring line forces, fatigue of mooring lines, and hydrodynamic power production. The first part of the study presents results from simulations of unit WEC in the frequency domain and in the time domain for regular wave and irregular sea state conditions. A verification of the two WECs’ motion responses and axial mooring line forces is made against measurement data from a full-scale installation. In the second part of the study, the influence of interaction effects is investigated when the WECs are installed in wave parks. The wave park simulations used a fully-coupled non-linear method in SESAM that calculates the motions of the WECs and the mooring line forces simultaneously in the time domain. The amount of fatigue damage accumulated in the mooring lines was calculated using a relative tension-based fatigue analysis method and the rainflow counting method. Several factors that influence the power performance of the wave park and the accumulated fatigue damage of the mooring lines, for example, the WEC distance of the wave park, the sea state conditions, and the direction of incoming waves, are simulated and discussed. The study's main conclusion is that WaveEL 4.0, which has a longer tube than WaveEL 3.0, absorbs more hydrodynamic energy due to larger heave motions and more efficient power production. At the same time, the accumulated fatigue damage in the moorings is lower compared to WaveEL 3.0 if the distance between the WECs in the wave park is not too short. Its motions in the horizontal plane are larger, which may require a larger distance between the WEC units in a wave park to avoid losing efficiency due to hydrodynamic interaction effects.