COVENTRY POLYTECHNIC ENTERPRISES LTD

Circular Clam Wave Energy Device

Outline Reference Frame Design

March 1992

Rendel

Rendel Palmer & Tritton

Development & Engineering Consultants
A High - Point Company

COVENTRY POLYTECHNIC ENTERPRISES LIMITED

Circular Clam Wave Energy Device

Outline Reference Frame Design

March 1992

Rendel

Rendel Palmer & Tritton

Development & Engineering Consultants
A High-Point Company

COVENTRY POLYTECHNIC ENTERPRISES LTD

COVENTRY POLYTECHNIC ENERGY SYSTEMS GROUP in association with

RENDEL PALMER & TRITTON LTD

Report on

Design Optimisation of the Reference Frame for the Circular Clam Wave Energy Device 21st January 1991 to 12 July 1991
with additional material, March 1992

For the period

Contract

A/5A/1691/2642

Coventry March 1992

Report Control Sheet Report Data Client Project : : Coventry Polytechnic Enterprises Ltd Circular Clam Wave Energy Outline Reference Frame Design R/DEA8/1

Report No :

Status and Approval

Revised Final

Final

Second Draft

Draft

Prel iminary Issue of Sections 2 to 6 Issue No Status Description of Amendment Prepared by Project Manager Project Director

Y01836-62

Rendel Palmer&Tritton

EXECUTIVE SUTOARY This report follows on from development work on the Circular Clam by Coventry Polytechnic between 1983 and 1986. It implements the recommendations of the RPT report to the Department of Energy in 1986 that the reference frame should be further developed. Steel and concrete hull concepts were developed to a sufficient stage to allow budget costing. The original 1986 tubular steel frame concept was rejected by comparison of the weights and relative costs of the structure with the steel hull scheme. The steel hull section design was based on the side buoyancy space of a hopper dredger which it resembles. Plate thicknesses were found to be governed by fatigue. The hull could be built at a number of UK or continental shipyards. The steel hull will be ballasted with inert water allowing the device to be de-ballasted for maintenance. Budget cost estimates within the range of 1.17m to 1.62m per device were obtained. The concrete hull device will be prestressed circumferentially and a number of possible stressing systems and construction facilities were considered. Because of the extra structural weight the concrete hull width is determined by buoyancy requirements and only trim ballast is required. Using standard civil engineering cost estimating techniques the cost was estimated to be in the range 1.25m to 1.88m. Cost estimates for both hull schemes were based on a production run of at least 10 devices and exclude design costs. Estimates were found to be sensitive to the availability of key shipyards or construction facilities. It is recommended that the lower price in the quoted range would be more likely to be achieved by going to tender in both steel and concrete to increase competition. The budget costs which are quoted at second quarter 1991 rates compare with a budget estimate of 1.705m for the tubular steel design assessed by RPT in October 1986 (a projected 2.19m at first quarter 1991 prices using DOE indices). A saving has therefore been achieved by changing from tubular truss to a more conventional hull cross section and a further programme of work leading to a prototype design has been recommended. The reductions in the cost of the circular Clam reference frame which were predicted by RPT in 1986 have now been demonstrated. Subject to other aspects of the design being satisfactory Rendel Palmer and Tritton (RPT) recommend that the next stage of development should lead to a prototype design.

1/15th scale Circular SEA Clam model under test at Loch Ness

ARTISTS

IMPRESSIONS

Cut-away sections of the CLAM Hull in Steel and Concrete

C I R C U L A R S E A CLAH :

Outline Device Specification

The data presented below represent a set of possible system parameters arising out of the outline design of the Clam and the work carried out in this contract. The air power productivity estimates have been made using energy absorption characteristics derived from tests carried out on l/15th scale models at Loch Ness, supported by simulation data. Turbine, generator and transmission efficiency values are those cited in our report "Development of the Circular Sea Clam", July '85 to March '86 (Contract E/5A/CON/1676/1381). The availability figure has been agreed through discussion between the Coventry team and AME staff appointed by Mr T. Thorpe of the Chief Scientists Group.

General Operating sites Distance from land Depth of water S Shetland/W Coast of Lewis typically < 2km typically > 30m

Nominal Device Dimensions Nominal diameter Hull width Hull depth Displacement
60m 4.5m average, concrete hull 4.0m average, steel hull 7.9m, concrete hull 8m, steel hull 5,005t + 235t ballast, concrete hull 922t + 3567t ballast, steel hull (see device parameters section of this report for full detail)

Air System No. membrane bag units Air connection system

12 off series

Turbines Turbo-generator No. of blades NACA No. Tip Dia. Design air power pod unit, flange mounted 6 0015/21

2m nominal
480kW

Generators Type Nominal speed Nameplate rating Max. overspeed Nominal output voltage Induction 1500 rpm 250 kW 3000 rpm 3.3 kV

Transmission Length of flexible cable, device to sea bed

typically 60m
N

Support profile Land line

lazy S' 3.3kV

Nominal Productivity, per device Capture air power average Turbine efficiency Generator efficiency Transmission efficiency Availability 1,450 kW 691 91% 962 922

Power to grid
Annual energy output

800 kW
7 GWh

CONTENTS

1. 2. 3.

INTRODUCTION SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS STABILITY CONSIDERATIONS

3.1 3.2
4.

Intact Stability Damage Stability

LOADS and DESIGN STANDARDS

4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4

5. 6.

Quasi Static Waveload Analysis Method Calculated Wave Loads Other Loads Design Standards

REVIEW OF 1986 DESIGN STEEL HULL DESIGN

6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5

6.6 7.

Main Features of the Design Strength and Fatigue Life Construction Considerations Launching Maintenance
Fabrication Cost

CONCRETE HULL DESIGN

7.1 7.2

Main Features of the Design Strength and Serviceability 7.2.1

7.2.2

Transverse Design
Longitudinal Design

7.3

Construction Considerations 7.3.1 7.3.2

7.3.3

Construction Facilities Construction Sequence

Prestressing Method

7.4 8.

Maintenance

COMPOSITE HULL DESIGN

8.1 8.2. 8.3 8.4

9.

General Hybrid Scheme Composite Scheme Conclusion

CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES APPENDICES DRAWINGS

1.0

INTRODUCTION This report outlines the work carried out by Coventry Polytechnic Enterprises (CPE) Ltd under Contract A/5A/1691/2642 over the period 21st January to 12th July 1991. The work carried out has involved the close co-operation of the Coventry Polytechnic Energy Systems Group and sub-contractors Rendel Palmer and Tritton Ltd (RPT) of London working together on the design optimisation of the reference frame of the Circular SEA Clam now reported.

The Circular Clam was conceived in 1983 and the first representative model of it was tested in December 1984. The results were presented to the Wave Energy Steering Committee with the claim that the higher efficiency of the Circular Clam, compared with the original straight SEA Clam, would allow a significant reduction in the cost of power A tubular steel design was offered at this time as generated. possible means of constructing the Clam with the required 60m diameter. The design was carried out quickly and was presented merely to demonstrate that a solution to the structural problem was available. It was stipulated that the design offered was not optimum and that further work would be essential to advance the structural solution. In October 1986 Rendel Palmer & Tritton Ltd, sub-contractors to CPE Ltd over the duration of the present contract, assessed the suitability of this tubular steel design and stated that the structural design proposed at the time was "in no way an optimal design from the point of view of efficient use of material or construction techniques". RPT assessed the costing of the Circular Clam for the Department of Energy in 1986 based on the design presented by Coventry Polytechnic (ref 2). RPT proposed a number of modifications to the design intended to ensure that the structure which was costed had an economic design life. However, RPT did not re-design the reaction frame and, in the conclusion to the report, stated that "more radical design modifications might be more cost effective and this would require a further design iteration and interaction with the design team". Since that time the Coventry Energy Systems Group has remained convinced that there was room for considerable improvement in the structural design and that this would lead to a reduction in structural costs. Y01836-62 1

The Department of Energy contract for the work now reported has enabled the recommendations in the RPT report of 1986 to be carried It was proposed initially that designs in concrete, steel and out. composities should be identified and explored in some depth. The aim was to further the structural design of the Circular Clam in time to make an input to the work currently in hand with Mr T Thorpe of the Chief Scientist's Group. In accordance with the scope of work set out in Appendix A RPT have, in this study, generated alternative designs relating to three options, explored optimum configurations, carried out analyses to prove concepts and, in conjunction with the Coventry team, developed three designs sufficiently to allow budget costing. Detailed costs have been estimated for only two designs since the third could be demonstrated to be more expensive by inspection. In scope of the work it was envisaged that the three designs would be:
a) an open 3D frame, as the 1986 designs;

b) c)

as closed steel hull; a closed concrete hull.

At an early stage in the work it was agreed that the open 3D frame should not be developed further in light of the progress made with the hull schemes and that, instead, a composite hull scheme should be examined to complete the three options. The Coventry Energy Systems Group has made no significant development to the design since the 1986 RPT report because of lack of funding. The designs have therefore been developed within overall geometrical constraints agreed between the Coventry team and RPT to ensure that performance is not substantially different from the original 1986 design. The principal constraints are: bag geometry 1986. Y01836-62 to be similar to that in the Clam report of RPT

inner duct to be "clean" inside and have facility for one turbine per section of the Clam (12 per Clam). sufficient residual buoyancy and sub-division by bulkheads for damage stability, with a minimum intact freeboard of 0.5m. other overall device dimensions (diameter, maintained as far as possible. depth) to be

The scope of the work is restricted to the reference frame and excludes moorings, mechanical and electrical equipment and bag attachments. Sections of the power duct between turbine units are included. The study also includes an assessment of the cost of construction and any site costs or temporary works and launching costs but excludes towing and installation on site. It was agreed at an early stage that all costs should be quoted on the basis of a production run of 10 devices but that any fixed costs should be identified separately to allow the costs to be adjusted for varying numbers of devices. Since the bag attachments have not yet been designed considerable thought was given to bag support and bag fitting. It was eventually agreed that a light bag support frame bolted to the reference frame at close centres and temporarily supported during installation should be adopted for the following reasons: the bag forces are spread fairly evenly along the edges of the bags. the function of the fixing is to provide a continuous seal and to provide continuous support (i.e. resist forces) around the edge of the bag; it is beneficial for the Clam structure to take the loads continuously - A stiffening frame to concentrate the load does nothing useful in service; it only functions during bag replacement; 3

Y01836-62

it follows that it would be more economical to provide a single "temporary" frame support which can then be used for a number of bags on the array of wave energy devices. In the modular can be decided study. longer term there may be maintenance advantages from having bag supports with sufficient internal strength so that they removed and replaced very quickly at sea. However it was that this development was outside the scope of the present

Y01836-62