You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently the saturation multiplier is formulated to stay between 0 and 1 in dynamics.m.
For a wave with given frequency \omega, the ideal Kp is: $K_{p,ideal} = m \omega^2 - K_h$
For the nominal design, $K_h = 7.6e6, m=6e6$, and $\omega$ ranges from 0.5 to 1.5 rad/s, so Kp_ideal ranges from -6.1 at low $\omega$ to +6.4e6 at high $\omega$. Since $K_{p,ideal}$ changes sign, that means having a saturation multiplier with a different sign would be beneficial. (See the notional hand-drawn plots on p228 of my notebook).
This could also be addressed by changing the problem formulation so that instead of choosing a single Kp for all sea states and then introducing sea state dependence through saturation only, a variety of design variables could be used to encode a $K_p(\omega)$ relationship. Changing the problem formulation is out of scope at this time.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
rebeccamccabe
changed the title
Allowing negative saturation multipliers could improve performance
Allowing negative saturation multipliers could improve power performance
Aug 12, 2022
Currently the saturation multiplier is formulated to stay between 0 and 1 in
$K_{p,ideal} = m \omega^2 - K_h$
dynamics.m
.For a wave with given frequency \omega, the ideal Kp is:
For the nominal design,$K_h = 7.6e6, m=6e6$ , and $\omega$ ranges from 0.5 to 1.5 rad/s, so Kp_ideal ranges from -6.1 at low $\omega$ to +6.4e6 at high $\omega$ . Since $K_{p,ideal}$ changes sign, that means having a saturation multiplier with a different sign would be beneficial. (See the notional hand-drawn plots on p228 of my notebook).
This could also be addressed by changing the problem formulation so that instead of choosing a single Kp for all sea states and then introducing sea state dependence through saturation only, a variety of design variables could be used to encode a$K_p(\omega)$ relationship. Changing the problem formulation is out of scope at this time.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: