• Andrews, E., and L. Peach, 2019: Wave monitoring equipment comparison: An evaluation of current and emerging in-situ ocean wave monitoring technology. Queensland Dept. of Environment and Science Coastal Impacts Unit Publ., 63 pp.

  • Bishop, C. T., and M. A. Donelan, 1987: Measuring waves with pressure transducers. Coastal Eng., 11, 309328, https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-3839(87)90031-7.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Casas-Prat, M., and L. H. Holthuijsen, 2010: Short-term statistics of waves observed in deep water. J. Geophys. Res., 115, C09024, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JC005742.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cossu, R., C. Heatherington, I. Penesis, R. Beecroft, and S. Hunter, 2020: Seafloor site characterization for a remote island OWC device near King Island, Tasmania, Australia. J. Mar. Sci. Eng., 8, 194, https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse8030194.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Forristall, G. Z., 2000: Wave crest distributions: Observations and second-order theory. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 30, 19311943, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(2000)030<1931:WCDOAS>2.0.CO;2.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gibbons, D. T., G. Jones, E. Siegel, A. Hay, and F. Johnson, 2005: Performance of a new submersible tide-wave recorder. Proc. OCEANS 2005 MTS/IEEE, Washington, DC, IEEE, 1057–1060, https://doi.org/10.1109/OCEANS.2005.1639895.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Goda, Y., and Y. Suzuki, 1976: Estimation of incident and reflected waves in random wave experiments. Proc. 15th Int. Conf. on Coastal Engineering, Honolulu, Hawaii, ASCE, 828–845.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Herbers, T. H. C., and T. T. Janssen, 2016: Lagrangian surface wave motion and stokes drift fluctuations. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 46, 10091021, https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-15-0129.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Herbers, T. H. C., P. F. Jessen, T. T. Janssen, D. B. Colbert, and J. H. MacMahan, 2012: Observing ocean surface waves with GPS-tracked buoys. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 29, 944959, https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00128.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Holthuijsen, L. H., 2007: Waves in Oceanic and Coastal Waters. Cambridge University Press, 404 pp.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Janssen, T., 2020: Data validation: Statistics at Mavericks. Sofar Ocean, https://www.sofarocean.com/posts/data-validation-statistics-at-mavericks.

  • Jeans, G., C. Primrose, N. Descusse, B. Strong, and P. v. Weert, 2003: A comparison between directional wave measurements from the RDI workhorse with waves and the Datawell Directional Waverider. Proc. IEEE/OES Seventh Working Conf. on Current Measurement Technology, San Diego, CA, IEEE, 148–151, https://doi.org/10.1109/CCM.2003.1194303.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Kuik, A. J., G. P. van Vledder, and L. H. Holthuijsen, 1988: A method for the routine analysis of pitch-and-roll buoy wave data. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 18, 10201034, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(1988)018<1020:AMFTRA>2.0.CO;2.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lancaster, O., R. Cossu, and T. E. Baldock, 2020: Experimental investigation into 3D scour processes around a gravity based oscillating water column wave energy converter. Coastal Eng., 161, 103754, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2020.103754.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Longuet-Higgins, M. S., 1986: Eulerian and Lagrangian aspects of surface waves. J. Fluid Mech., 173, 683707, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112086001325.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lygre, A., and H. E. Krogstad, 1986: Maximum entropy estimation of the directional distribution in ocean wave spectra. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 16, 20522060, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(1986)016<2052:MEEOTD>2.0.CO;2.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McAllister, M. L., and T. S. van den Bremer, 2019: Lagrangian measurement of steep directionally spread ocean waves: Second-order motion of a wave-following measurement buoy. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 49, 30873108, https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-19-0170.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McAllister, M. L., and T. S. van den Bremer, 2020: Experimental study of the statistical properties of directionally spread ocean waves measured by buoys. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 50, 399414, https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-19-0228.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pawka, S. S., 1983: Island shadows in wave directional spectra. J. Geophys. Res., 88, 25792591, https://doi.org/10.1029/JC088iC04p02579.

  • Raghukumar, K., G. Chang, F. Spada, C. Jones, T. Janssen, and A. Gans, 2019: Performance characteristics of “Spotter,” a newly developed real-time wave measurement buoy. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 36, 11271141, https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-18-0151.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • RBR, 2018: Ruskin user guide (compact loggers). RBR Doc., 77 pp.

  • Sheng, W., H. Li, and J. Murphy, 2017: An improved method for energy and resource assessment of waves in finite water depths. Energies, 10, 1188, https://doi.org/10.3390/en10081188.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Shih, H. H., C. Long, M. Bushnell, and K. Hathaway, 2005: Intercomparison of wave data between Triaxys directional wave buoy, ADCP, and other reference wave instruments. 24th Int. Conf. on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Halkidiki, Greece, ASME, 655–663, https://doi.org/10.1115/OMAE2005-67235.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Sofar Ocean, 2020a: Spotter: The agile metocean buoy. Sofar Ocean, https://www.sofarocean.com/products/spotter.

  • Sofar Ocean, 2020b: Wave parameter definitions. Sofar Ocean Doc., 6 pp., https://content.sofarocean.com/hubfs/Spotter%20product%20documentation%20page/wave-parameter-definitions.pdf.

  • Teledyne RD Instruments, 2011: WavesMon v3.08 user’s guide. Teledyne RD Instruments Doc., 72 pp.

  • Teledyne RD Instruments, 2017: Waves primer: Wave Measurements and the TRDI ADCP Waves Array Technique. Teledyne RD Instruments Doc., 32 pp., http://www.teledynemarine.com/Documents/Brand_Support/RD_INSTRUMENTS/Technical_Resources/Manuals_and_Guides/General_Interest/Waves_Primer_Jul17.pdf.

  • Wave Swell Energy, 2021: Wave Swell Energy’s UniWave200 is installed at King Island. Wave Swell Energy, https://www.waveswell.com/king-island/wave-swell-energys-uniwave200-is-installed-at-king-island/.

  • Work, P. A., 2008: Nearshore directional wave measurements by surface-following buoy and acoustic Doppler current profiler. Ocean Eng., 35, 727737, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2008.02.005.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 34 34 34
PDF Downloads 43 43 43

Comparative Wave Measurements at a Wave Energy Site with a Recently Developed Low-Cost Wave Buoy (Spotter), ADCP, and Pressure Loggers

View More View Less
  • 1 aSchool of Civil Engineering, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  • | 2 bSofar Ocean Inc., San Francisco, California
  • | 3 cWave Swell Energy Ltd., Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Restricted access

Abstract

Wave measurements from a new, low-cost, real-time wave buoy (Spotter) are investigated in a comparative study as part of a site characterization study at a wave energy candidate site at King Island, Tasmania, Australia. Measurements from the Sofar Ocean Spotter buoy are compared with concurrent measurements from a Teledyne RD Instrument (RDI) 1200 kHz Work Horse ADCP and two RBRsolo3 D wave16 pressure loggers. The comparison period between 8 August and 12 October 2019 provides both the shallowest and longest continuous published comparison undertaken with the Spotter buoy. Strong agreement was evident between the Spotter buoy and RDI ADCP of key wave parameters including the significant wave height, peak wave period, and mean wave direction, with the mean values of those parameters across the full deployment period agreeing within 3%. Surface wave spectra and directional spectra are also analyzed with good agreement observed over the majority of the frequency domain, although the Spotter buoy records approximately 17% less energy within a narrow frequency band near the peak frequency when compared to the RDI ADCP. Measurements derived from the pressure loggers routinely underestimated the significant wave height and overestimated the mean wave period over the deployment period. The comparison highlights the suitability of the Spotter buoy for low-cost wave resource studies, with accurate measurements of key parameters and spectra observed.

© 2021 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).

Corresponding author: Orrin Lancaster, orrin.lancaster@uqconnect.edu.au

Abstract

Wave measurements from a new, low-cost, real-time wave buoy (Spotter) are investigated in a comparative study as part of a site characterization study at a wave energy candidate site at King Island, Tasmania, Australia. Measurements from the Sofar Ocean Spotter buoy are compared with concurrent measurements from a Teledyne RD Instrument (RDI) 1200 kHz Work Horse ADCP and two RBRsolo3 D wave16 pressure loggers. The comparison period between 8 August and 12 October 2019 provides both the shallowest and longest continuous published comparison undertaken with the Spotter buoy. Strong agreement was evident between the Spotter buoy and RDI ADCP of key wave parameters including the significant wave height, peak wave period, and mean wave direction, with the mean values of those parameters across the full deployment period agreeing within 3%. Surface wave spectra and directional spectra are also analyzed with good agreement observed over the majority of the frequency domain, although the Spotter buoy records approximately 17% less energy within a narrow frequency band near the peak frequency when compared to the RDI ADCP. Measurements derived from the pressure loggers routinely underestimated the significant wave height and overestimated the mean wave period over the deployment period. The comparison highlights the suitability of the Spotter buoy for low-cost wave resource studies, with accurate measurements of key parameters and spectra observed.

© 2021 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).

Corresponding author: Orrin Lancaster, orrin.lancaster@uqconnect.edu.au
Save