1. Wave Energy Conversion Team: Andrew Cameron Brent MacLean Helen McDonald Steve McDonald Nicholas Smith Supervisors:Dr. Robert Bauer Dr. Larry Hughes Richard Rachals Sponsor:

2. The Project Objective To design and build a working scaled model of a 100W wave energy converter. Design Requirements Scalability Serviceability Simplicity Mean power output of at least 100W Cost less than $1,000.00 Resilient to adverse weather conditions

3. The Design Dynamic Buoy Stationary Shaft (stator) Linear Generator and Alignment System are housed within the buoy. Removable Top Cap

4. Presentation Outline Construction of Reciprocating Inducting Point Absorber (RIPA) Shape Testing Design and Testing of Linear Generator Mathematical Model Concluding Remarks

5. Construction

6. RIPA - Construction Design Prototype Proof of Concept Main Components Shaft Pod Buoy Shaft Pod Buoy

7. RIPA - Construction Construction Characteristics Inexpensive Low or non-corrosive materials Non-magnetic materials Simplistic (University Resources) Primary Element Linear Generator: Coils & Magnets

8. RIPA - Construction Shaft Assembly Linear Generator Stator Support Shaft Upper Support Shaft Linear Generator Stator Lower Support Shaft

9. RIPA - Construction Linear Generator Stator Stainless Steel Shaft 510 turns of 30 AWG Magnet Wire per coil Epoxy coated

10. RIPA – Construction Pod Components Magnet Sleeve Assembly Alignment System Alignment Support Ring Yoke Assemblies

11. RIPA - Construction Pod Assembly Threaded Rods Set Screws

12. RIPA - Construction Buoy Assembly Buoy Internal Structure Upper Core Lower Core Top Cap Rubber Foam

13. RIPA - Construction Overall Assembly

14. Shape Testing

15. Buoy Shape Considerations Choose shape based on Lowest Damping Ratio Closest Natural Frequency to Desired Range Verify Mathematical Model Justify Assumptions

16. Drop Test Dropped Shapes from set height Measured Vertical Displacement Characterized natural frequency damping ratio Verified Mathematical Model

17. Experimental Correlation

18. Damping Ratio Variation

19. Natural Frequency Variation

20. Desired Range

21. Shape Conclusions Original Testing Results Cylinder Revised Testing Cone Mishap During Manufacturing of Second Shape

22. Linear Generator

23. Linear Generator Design Goal produce a linear generator capable of functioning in multiple wave heights accomplished by the use of annular (ring- shaped) magnets and the orientation of the magnets

24. Linear Generator Testing Part 1 Predicted Value for Magnetic Flux Magnet Flux Rating =1.21Tesla

25. Linear Generator Testing Part 1 Drop Testing For Determination of Flux Initial drop testing was performed to try to quantify the amount of flux interacting with coils Single magnet dropped at fixed heights for constant velocity 100 turns of copper Attached to oscilloscope to obtain a reading for maximum voltage

26. Linear Generator Testing Part 1 Actual Value for Magnetic Flux From the drop testing, peak voltage is determined Velocity, length of coil, and number of turns are known and constant Average Magnetic Flux = 0.46T

27. Matlab Validation

28. Drop Testing With Pod Same type of testing as with single magnet Only one velocity could be tested Average Magnetic Flux: B=0.51T

29. Mathematical Model

30. RIPA In Action

31. Mathematical Modeling MatLab Simulink Invaluable tool to build a model Fundamental formulas implemented Built up simulator starting with first principles Specialized simulators for specific tests

32. Model Verification Simulated lab conditions to ensure that the model accurately predicts results Model validated using multiple test situations Step Input simulation to characterize buoy shape dynamics Drop test simulation to characterize magnet interaction

33. Model Verification Voltage comparison

34. Extrapolated Results Simulator used to determine requirements to meet project goal of 100W

35. Extrapolated Results Magnet strength and scale not changed Buoy dimensions changed Electrical characteristics modified Larger amplitude wave input Requires more coils to accommodate longer stroke Longer period waves

36. Closing Remarks

37. Extrapolations Wave Input 0.5 m amplitude, 1.5 sec period Device Configuration 16 inch buoy diameter 500 turns per coil with reduced impedance 50 coils 9 sets of magnets Average Output 100W

38. Cost Material Changes Magnets Fiberglass Inner core Material

39. Design Requirements Requirements Met Scalability Serviceability Simplicity Mean power output of 100W Requirements Not Met Cost less than $1,000.00 Resilient to adverse weather conditions

40. Thank You Sponsor Mr. Richard Rachals Supervisors Dr. Robert Bauer Dr. Larry Hughes Technicians Angus Macpherson Peter Jones Greg Jollimore Stuart Carr Brian Liekens Outside Resource Dr. Timothy Little Mechanical Engineering Department

41. QUESTIONS???