April 28 Canada Pavilion ICOE Conference, Washington DC, 0nepager .pdf
TEST RESULTS
TESTING Program at Vancouver Wave Energy Test Station 20192020
The test station provides, literally, a solid independent place to stand (in the water) to make observations and measurements and do onsite analysis on a 24/7 basis as required. A floating, moored vessel would not be suitable for observations as it moves with the waves and a spud barge would not be safe during storms when it is most important to make observations and measurements.
The Vancouver wave test station will also enable 3rd parties to witness the testing and verify the results of the tests with their own equipment.
Test 2:
The calculations of continuous "firm" power output produced using the Fourie theoretical physics model of the Neptune Wave Engine with respect to optimizing the continuous power output by varying variables in the active PTO and confirming the effect of other systembuilt specific variables will be verified or not or to what degree from the resultant testing data.
This important because it will show that the NeptuneWave Engine can output power on a 24/7 basis for at least the same number of days per year that fossil fuel and nuclear plants do.
Test 1:
The calculations of electrical power output (kWh) using the Fourie theoretical physics model 6 of the Neptune Wave Engine will be verified, or not, or to what degree when compared to the actual power output from the full size Neptune Engine model no. 11019 using the the accurate 10 Hz on site measurements of wave height, wave period and water depth on a wave by wave basis and entered into
Chart 1 (below), averaged over 1 hour periods.
This empirical data will also permit a determination of 3 other uncertainties*:
Name Plate Rating, Capacity Factor and system efficiency for a variable energy input system.
Test 3:
To determine, if possible, a reliable nexus of data between: (a) the Environment Canada weather station 46146 (Halibut Bank) data, providing statistical “significant” wave height (Hs or Hm0), and, (b) the 10 Hz actual wave energy wave height & period data measured at the test site approximately 20 km to the east.
It is also uncertain if the formula**: H = Hs / √2, (where H is average wave height and Hs is significant wave height) is valid based on real life measurements or what a modified formula for [H = Hs / xxx] would be.
The Hs metric was invented & is used for marine safety and wave forecasting **.
Test 4:
It is widely held*** that: if 2 wave energy floats (point absorbers) are lined up one behind the other and at 90 degrees to a wave train that the energy obtainable from the rear float will be
reduced to a large degree by the amount of energy obtained from the wave(s) by the front float.
We tested a scale model of this part of the Neptune wave engine with this configuration (using 2 to 24 floats) in a wave tank. The tank test results did not support this supposition.
Testing of the fullsized engine will confirm, or not, and/or the actual power obtained per float of this “in line” issue, and particularly, when the distance between the outside edges of both floats is less than the wavelength being observed.
__________________
* see paper: "Wave Energy Industry Concerns  verifiable transparency & standards are required for Name Plate Rating, Capacity Factor & System Efficiency for renewable systems with variable energy input such as Wave, Solar, Wind & Tidal" at https://www.neptunewave.ca/downloads
** see paper: "Conversion Factor  Convert Hs to H and H to Hs" at https://www.neptunewave.ca/downloads
*** for example: “The directionaveraged maximum absorbed wave power for an array of WEC units.” J. Falnes, 2015
2010 Neptune 0.1
Linear Generator Direct Drive with generator on top out of water
As data is gathered and analyzed from the Vancouver Wave Test Station it will be reported in blank boxes in Scatter Chart 1:
2. Formulas used are:
Theory (i) wave transport power (watts), a horizontal force, per m length of wave crest:
Theory (ii) kinetic energy to lift 1 cubic m sea water from trough to crest + same amount as potential energy at the wave crest ready to falldown, an up & down vertical energy (Joules) per horizontal m^2:
Projected Neptune Engine kWh is from a proprietary formula based on the theoretical physics model of the wave engine. These are the kWh projections we expect to verify.
Legend
1. Values in the scatter chart are:
Red = hours /year;
Black and Blue = calculations from 3 formulas to determine kWh using the Neptune Engine Model 11019;
Blank Boxes are to be filled in with actual measured data so comparisons can be made.
3. Definitions:
r = 1025 kg/m^3 (sea water density);
g = 9.81 m/s^2 (gravity);
pi = 3.1416;
L = m (length);
T or Te = s (wave period);
H = m (average wave height);
Hs or Hm0 = m (significant w. height);
a = m (amplitude = H/2);
NOTE: formula: H = Hs / √2 is used when wave height is only available as an Hs value, details see: https://www.neptunewave.ca/downloads
NeptuneWave Engine Model 11019:
Efficiency of Neptune Wave Engine = 50% Length (diameter) of Neptune Float point absorber = 2.74 m
Area of Neptune Float point absorber = 5.9 m^2 Depth of water at deployment site = 8.0 m
Wavelength site: [period (s): wavelength (m)]: 2.0:6.2; 2.5:9.8; 3.0:14.0; 3.5:18.9; 4.0:24.2; 4.5:29.6; 5.0:34.9; 5.5:40.1;
6.0:45.2; 6.5:50.2; 7.0:55.8; 7.5 60.1;
NOTE: For wave periods 2.0, 2.5 & 3.0 seconds the water depth at 8 m is considered “deep”;
For other wavelengths and velocities the depth is considered “transitional”, at no point is the depth considered "shallow";
For wave phase and group velocities see: https://www.neptunewave.ca/downloads
Note:
The actual test data we have before the Scatter Chart 1 is completed is very preliminary and is based on 1 test of 1 point absorber for 2 hours in June of 2019.
This test was for a
0.75 high wave by 4 second period, we obtained an average of 11 kWh of power per hour continuously.
Result:
We can confidently calculate from this 2 hour test the following:
Given:

.8 MW wave engine

In a typical low wave regime which has (weighted averages):
1.7 m high waves with 8.4 second periods for 8,000 hours per year
(we are using NOAA Data for a typical low wave height regime, near shore location)
The electrical output will be:

Firm Power for 8,000 hours = 350 kWh per hour

Over Firm Power 1 for 2,650 hours = 100 kWh per hour

Over Firm Power 2 for 3,205 hours = 253 kWh per hour

Over Firm Power 3 for 1,465 hours = 364 kWh per hour

Over Firm Power 4 for 203 hours = 1,501 kWh per hour

Over Firm Power 5 for 339 hours = 492 kWh per hour

Over Firm Power 6 for 68 hours = 655 kWh per hour
Total = 4,926 MWh per year of 8,000 hours
Recently an English Channel Wind Farm organization asked
Neptune Wave to provide data for a feasibility study.
Here is the wave height and wave period data they provided
and the projected power that a 1.0  4.0 MWv Neptune Wave engine would provide:
Combining proven test units backed by decades of governmentfunded wave energy research with a
revolutionary wave engine technology to add a new commercial method for firm base load electricity
production that is carbon emission free and competitively priced