Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “floating”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 127 records · Page 7
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

Power output of turbines mounted on tension-leg platforms subjected to fully developed ocean gravity waves

A concern in the deployment of large wind turbines on ocean floating platforms is the effect of floating-platform motions on their electrical power generation. Further, it is not clear how floating motions influence waking, which might affect the combined power generation of collections of turbines. We examine the average power output of a single and a collection of NREL 5 MW wind turbines mounted on a tension-leg platform (TLP) under the action of fully developed ocean wave motions, coupling floating motions with the large-eddy simulation (LES) of atmospheric and rotor dynamics. The ocean dynamics enter as fully developed waves derived from the Pierson–Moskowitz spectrum. To assess the influence of ocean motions, we performed simulations over the full range of wind speeds in the operational range of the turbine, reporting comparisons of average power output when the platforms are allowed to move to when they are held rigidly in place. In all simulations, we find that the effects of the TLP floating-platform's induced motions have a minor effect on single and multiple turbine power production and wake deficits. Even when using coherent and large amplitude harmonic-floating-induced perturbations, any significant wake modifications from floating motions are confined to the near-wake region, where downstream turbines are unlikely to be located. The relatively small amplitude of TLP motions relative to pre-existing turbulent fluctuations are the primary reason for low wake and power modifications downstream.

Restrepo, Juan [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000326092882)↗
DOE OSTI2024

FTTN: Feature-Targeted Testing for Numerical Properties of NVIDIA & AMD Matrix Accelerators

While NVIDIA has been the dominant provider of GPUs for HPC and ML, now AMD has several offerings of GPUs. This encourages programmers to try out AMD GPUs for new codes and also port existing codes over. Unfortunately, without understanding the floating-point differences between these GPU types, software development or porting can introduce bugs—and currently such an understanding is lacking. The magnitude of this open question becomes clear if one imagines the the number of floating-point precision choices (FP16, FP32, etc.), floating-point formats (standard floats, brain-float, etc.), and execution units available (elementary units, matrix/tensor cores, etc.) Questions such as rounding modes and subnormal support are also important. Most of these answers are unknown today or are hard to access. We provide the first testing-guided approach that answers a significant number of these questions. We also devise tests to reveal internal information (e.g., extra bits kept) to make sure that our findings are reliable. Many of our tests employ systematically generated random-programs, others apply fast-math flags and some involve fused multiplyadd. Especially for tensor/matrix cores, the tests have nontrivial logic that we present Our testing approach is reusable for the plethora of GPUs yet to be introduced. Our findings include up to 7 ulps of difference between NVIDIA and AMD for sin and cos at FP32 precision and 3 ulp at FP64. In our study of matrix cores (NVIDIA) and tensor cores (AMD), we have extensively characterized rounding modes (truncation versus round-to-nearest), the number of extra internal bits kept (whether 3 bits are kept or not), subnormal support for inputs and outputs across four different floating-point formats and across NVIDIA A100 and AMD MI250X GPUs. We believe that this wealth of data becoming available for the first time may help avoid significant porting bugs when migrating code across these platforms.

Li, Xinyi↗
DOE OSTI2024

WEC-Sim Modeling of Laminar Scientific's Patented Seesaw Wave Energy Converter: Preprint

Laminar Scientific's patented seesaw wave energy converter was modeled in WEC-Sim to predict performance. The device operates by utilizing ocean surface waves to rotate a truss in pitch about a pivot. The pivot is located at the top of two pylons, which are embedded in the seafloor. The seesaw has a float on either end, and the buoyancy forces from each float cause the system to rise or fall with passing waves. Device performance relies upon seesaw length and ocean wavelength creating an antiphase effect. The seesaw truss has an adjustable length intended to achieve this effect. The operation method enforces a narrow band of wavelengths which induce the largest rotational motion from the device. The hydrodynamic analysis of the device was performed using Capytaine, and the results confirmed that the device operates best in a narrow frequency band. Four float-to-float spacing cases and three pylon radii were examined. The hydrodynamic results indicate a match between the model and the physical expectations for the device, and that varying the pylon radii by 0.1-m increments for three instances creates minimal changes in hydrodynamic properties. Power matrices for three float spacing cases of the device were simulated with Joint North Sea Wave Project spectra waves and optimal power take-off damping in WEC-Sim. The maximum average power production for the 15-m spacing case was 14.1 kW with a 5.0-s peak wave period and 4-m significant wave heights. Plots of capture-width ratios indicated that the device performance was linear and confirmed that the device is optimal in a narrow frequency band. The maximum percentage of the available wave power produced by the 15-m device was approximately 16%. Simulations of the device in regular waves were used to produce plots of average power compared to a ratio of float spacing to wavelength. These plots indicate that the power production is maximized at a ratio of 0.5, and further confirm that the device has a narrow frequency response. The device was simulated at an example field location, where the device produced an annual average power rating of 1.6 kW given an average omnidirectional wave climate of 10.3 kW m-1 and an optimal, linearized power take-off model. While the maximum predicted device performance is reliant upon a narrow band of wave frequencies, the conducted analysis provides an opportunity to improve device design prior to prototyping and testing. Modifying the design to respond to a broader frequency range would improve device performance.

numerical modeling↗
DOE OSTI2024

Validation of Local Structural Loads Computed by OpenFAST Against Measurements From the FOCAL Experimental Campaign

This work presents the validation of the local structural load modeling capability in OpenFAST for floating substructures based on data from the FOCAL experimental campaign. Previously, OpenFAST could only represent the floating substructure as a rigid body, and though this approach can model the global response of the floater in most cases, it is not able to capture the structural loads within the floater's individual members. Consideration of local substructure loads is important for some floating designs, because the pursuit of cost reduction often results in lighter and more flexible structures. To address this limitation, the HydroDyn (hydrodynamics) and SubDyn (substructure dynamics) modules of OpenFAST have been recently extended to account for the flexibility of floating substructures. To validate this new capability, we compare the results obtained by OpenFAST with data measured during the FOCAL experimental campaign, which analyzed a 1:70 scale performance-matched model of the IEA 15-MW reference turbine atop a modified University of Maine VolturnUS-S semisubmersible in a wave basin under the action of both wind and waves. For the purposes of the present work, the most important feature of the experiment is the presence of load cells at the root of each pontoon, and our objective is to assess how well those loads are reproduced by OpenFAST. To model the distributed hydrodynamic and hydrostatic loads along the floating substructure, we adopt a strip-theory approach based on the Morison equation, and we discuss the impact of different hydrodynamic modeling options (wave stretching, MacCamy-Fuchs correction, and second-order wave kinematics) on both motions and loads. For simplicity, we focus on wave-only conditions, both regular and irregular. The results demonstrate good overall agreement for the loads at the root of the pontoons for the waves analyzed in this work, especially given the assumptions and simplifications inherent to a simple strip-theory model.

floating offshore wind turbine↗
DOE OSTI2024

Validation of Local Structural Loads Computed by OpenFAST Against Measurements From the Focal Experimental Campaign: Preprint

This work presents the validation of the local structural load modeling capability in OpenFAST for floating substructures based on data from the FOCAL experimental campaign. Previously, OpenFAST could only represent the floating substructure as a rigid body, and though this approach can model the global response of the floater in most cases, it is not able to capture the structural loads within its individual members. Consideration of local substructure loads is important for some floating designs, as the pursuit of cost reduction often results in lighter and more flexible structures. To address this limitation, the HydroDyn (hydrodynamics) and SubDyn (substructure dynamics) modules of OpenFAST have been recently extended to account for the flexibility of floating substructures. To validate this new capability, we compare the results obtained by OpenFAST with data measured during the FOCAL experimental campaign, which analyzed a 1:70 scale performance-matched model of the IEA 15-MW reference turbine atop a modified University of Maine VolturnUS-S semisubmersible in a wave basin under the action of both wind and waves. For the purposes of the present work, the most important feature of the experiment is the presence of load cells at the root of each pontoon, and our objective is to assess how well those loads are reproduced by OpenFAST. To model the distributed hydrodynamic and hydrostatic loads along the floating substructure, we adopt a strip-theory approach based on the Morison equation, and we discuss the impact of different hydrodynamic modeling options (wave stretching, MacCamy-Fuchs correction, and second-order wave kinematics) on both motions and loads. For simplicity, we focus on wave-only conditions, both regular and irregular. The results demonstrate good overall agreement for the loads at the root of the pontoons for the waves analyzed in this work, especially given the assumptions and simplifications inherent to a simple strip-theory model.

floating offshore wind turbine↗
DOE OSTI2024

Fox Trails

1. This software utilizes python pandas to pull data from P6 databases or XER files. The software transforms the datasets into multiple main tables by joining, filtering, iteratively flattening hierarchical structured data, and pivoting datasets to give simple flat output tables. The activity table includes all of the information related to an activity including activity codes, global, EPS, and project codes, UDFs, and WBS information as separate columns. This includes the code id, code value and sequence number for all levels in hierarchical codes. The resource table is similar to the activity table and includes all of the information related to resources on activities including UPFs and resource codes. The resource time phased table takes the resource information and time phases it for the budget, forecast, late, and actual dates/units/costs that closely matches P6's user interface's values as it implements the resource curve and calendars. The wbs table contains the WBS structure broken out by levels and includes UDFs, codes, and notebook topics. The final P6 data table is the relationships table which simply contains the relationships. 2. When a user updates the tool with data (via giving it P6 project names with database username/password information or XER files) the system creates the data in #1, then creates a networkx graph with the activity data imbedded in the node data and the relationships added as edges. Each edge also has it's float calculated (working time distance between the predecessor and successor) and attached to the edge. Activities are also tagged as a potential start of a path based on their constraints, constraint dates, remaining start date, and activity status. When a user enters an activity ID into the UI, it runs a shortest path calculation on the network graph between each node tagged as potential start to the entered activity id based on the float tagged on the edge. Each path returned by the algorithm contains all of the nodes on the path in order, as well as the total float of the edges that make the path. This data is then collected and returned to the user in the form of a gantt chart with groupings for each path that includes the total float for each group. 3. Similar to 2, if the user passes through a reference dataset each activity set in the path is checked to see if it had a path in the reference dataset, if that path was the primary path between the start and end activities, and what has changed regarding logic and durations. These changes are color coded and summarized before sent to the user to be displayed by the UI for simple discovery. 4. Utilizing the data from #1, the user can submit desired grouping code(s) and filters to the system. The system will then pull the activities, resources, and relationships and create a gantt chart based on the groupings sent and filtered based on the filters sent. 5. The system will produce a gantt chart in a similar method to #4, but allows interactivity with the data. As the user interacts with the gantt chart, the software captures the changes and stores it with the user making the change so that project controls and implement those changes in P6.

Fox, Ben↗
DOE OSTI2024

Advancing community-engaged research for offshore wind on the West Coast

The Biden Administration has called for 30 GW of offshore wind (OSW) to be implemented by 2030 and 15 GW of floating OSW by 2035. Because floating OSW is a novel technology for the West Coast, the United States, and the world, there is limited information about the implications of floating OSW for coastal communities. Floating OSW faces a complex regulatory landscape and a wide set of interested parties that stand to gain or lose based on the development process and outcomes. Key agencies are often siloed in their mission space, with little attention or resources for innovation in planning. Furthermore, many communities along the West Coast of the U.S. have experienced the boom-and-bust cycles of large, extractive industries that use coastal resources to benefit consumers in other locations, while leaving behind few long-lasting benefits at the local level. These siloes in government and civic society, and the lack of trust born out of past failures, make it difficult for communities, government agencies, scientists, and industry to plan for OSW based on community values and concerns. There is a need to develop projects that more equitably distribute benefits while safeguarding the ocean ecosystems upon which coastal populations depend.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Variable Curvature Pultruded Vertical Axis Wind Blades

XFlow Energy is developing a floating offshore vertical-axis wind turbine (VAWT) enabling a 70% reduction in the levelized cost of energy compared to floating horizontal-axis wind turbines (HAWTs). While the wind industry has historically been successful at lowering the cost of terrestrial wind systems, there are no scalable, economically viable floating wind solutions on the market with the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) of current floating offshore solutions is $200/MWh (Musial 2022). Low-cost blade production is one of the key technologies for realizing this target LCOE reduction. The proposed design uses a constant cross-section blade, enabling the use of pultrusion, a continuous, automated, mold-free production method. By employing blades with variable curvature, XFlow can minimize the bending stresses in the blades, allowing for light-weighting. Constant curvature pultrusion has been demonstrated on hollow sections. Variable curvature pultrusion has been demonstrated on solid sections. This project aims to develop a method of variable curvature pultrusion for hollow sections, as required for mass-optimal VAWT blades.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Variable Curvature Pultruded Vertical Axis Wind Blades

XFlow Energy is developing a floating offshore vertical-axis wind turbine (VAWT) enabling a 70% reduction in the levelized cost of energy compared to floating horizontal-axis wind turbines (HAWTs). While the wind industry has historically been successful at lowering the cost of terrestrial wind systems, there are no scalable, economically viable floating wind solutions on the market with the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) of current floating offshore solutions is $\$$200/MWh (Musial 2022). Low-cost blade production is one of the key technologies for realizing this target LCOE reduction. The proposed design uses a constant cross-section blade, enabling the use of pultrusion, a continuous, automated, mold-free production method. By employing blades with variable curvature, XFlow can minimize the bending stresses in the blades, allowing for light-weighting. Constant curvature pultrusion has been demonstrated on hollow sections. Variable curvature pultrusion has been demonstrated on solid sections. This project aims to develop a method of variable curvature pultrusion for hollow sections, as required for mass-optimal VAWT blades.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

FOCAL Campaign II/III: Applying Active Hull Controls Using Tuned-mass Dampers/Hull Flexibility and Internal Loads

Campaign II and III of the Floating Offshore-wind Controls Advanced Laboratory Experimental Program (FOCAL) aimed to generate a dataset enabling the validation of the performance and loads of a scaled hull, with and without structural hull control. The floating platform was subjected to a variety of wave environments and controlled using tuned-mass dampers (TMDs) tuned to two of the systems natural frequencies (Platform Pitch and Tower-bending). The floating platform is fully instrumented to record a variety of parameters in real time such as platform dynamics, accelerations, and loads at different points in the structure. The test data considered was generated at the University of Maine's Harold Alfond Wind and Wave (W2) testing facility. This testing was focused only on validation of wave loading, and wind conditions were not considered. As such the platform does not support a working turbine, and instead supports a structure designed to have the same mass properties as the 1:70 IEA 15MW Reference turbine. The Load Cases (LC) considered in this testing campaign are as follows: LC 1.X - Platform Static Offset (TMD off); LC 2.X - Platform Free-decays (TMD off); LC 3.X - Wave Cases (Regular Wave, Irregular Wave, Pink Noise Wave) with and without TMDs active. Detailed properties on the model system are found in the following reference: Lenfest E., Floating Offshore-wind Controls Advanced Laboratory (FOCAL) Experimental Program - Campaigns 2 and 3: 1:70 Model-scale Testing of the IEA-Wind 15MW Reference Turbine and the VolturnUS-S Hull. UMaine ASCC Report Number 23-56-1183.

17 WIND ENERGY↗