Comparison of physics-based and machine learning methods for phase-resolved prediction of waves measured in the field

Authors

  • Jialun Chen The University of Western Australia
  • Thobani Hlophe The University of Western Australia
  • Wenhua Zhao The University of Western Australia
  • Ian A. Milne The University of Western Australia
  • David Gunawan The University of Wollongong
  • Adi Kurniawan The University of Western Australia
  • Hugh Wolgamot The University of Western Australia
  • Paul H. Taylor The University of Western Australia
  • Jana Orszaghova The University of Western Australia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36688/ewtec-2023-488

Keywords:

Wave prediction, Machine learning, Wave buoys, Field data, Wave phase, Control

Abstract

Phase-resolved predictions of surface waves can be used to optimize a wide variety of marine applications. In this paper, we compare predictions obtained using two independent methods for field data, with horizons sufficient to control wave energy converters.

The first method is physics-based prediction. In this method, a set of optimal representative angles, obtained using an optimization algorithm given time histories of a wave buoy motion in 3D, are used for forward propagation based on linear wave theory. The second method is a machine learning method using an Artificial Neural Network (ANN) which requires longer records for training.

Field measurements were obtained from the Southern Ocean of Albany, WA. The field data were collected by an upwave ‘detection’ array of 3 Sofar Spotter wave buoys and a downwave ‘prediction’ point coincident with a Datawell Waverider-4. All buoys were soft-moored, and data were collected over 3 months in 2022. Selected intervals during this period are presented in the paper to compare and contrast the predictions made by the two different methods. We find that some wave fields can be predicted well over more than a period in advance, all that is required for active control of a wave power take-off in a renewable energy application. In contrast, highly spread sea states remain a challenge. The methods are also compared in terms of the complexity and time required for making predictions. Further discussions are made on the applicability of the results to other locations.

Published

2023-09-02

How to Cite

[1]
“Comparison of physics-based and machine learning methods for phase-resolved prediction of waves measured in the field”, Proc. EWTEC, vol. 15, Sep. 2023, doi: 10.36688/ewtec-2023-488.

Similar Articles

11-20 of 235

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.

Most read articles by the same author(s)