ARTICLE IN PRESS

Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng

Design of a prototype ocean current

turbinePart I: mathematical modeling
and dynamics simulation
J. VanZwietena, F.R. Driscolla,, A. Leonessaa,1, G. Deaneb,2
a
Department of Ocean Engineering, Florida Atlantic University, 101 North Beach Road,
Dania Beach, FL 33004, USA
b
Aquantis LLC, 6305 Carpinteria, Victoria, BC, Canada V8W 3P6
Received 9 June 2005; accepted 11 October 2005
Available online 19 January 2006

Abstract

The C-Plane is a submerged variable depth ocean current turbine that is tethered to the
sea oor and uses sustained ocean currents to produce electricity. As part of the development
1
of a 30 th scale physical model of the C-Plane, a mathematical model and dynamics simulation
of the prototype was developed and is presented in this paper. This three-dimensional
mathematical model represents the C-Plane as a rigid body with moveable control surfaces
that is moored with three linear elastic cable elements. Gravitational, buoyancy,
hydrodynamic, cable, gyroscopic, and inertial forces are included and a PC-based dynamics
simulation is created. The simulation demonstrates that the C-Plane is stable and capable of
changing depth in all expected operating conditions. The C-Plane prototype can y level from
a height of 3 to 6 m using the conguration suggested in this paper. The maximum ascent rates
of the C-Plane with a water speed of 0.3 m/s are 0.015 m/s when the pitch is xed at 01 and

Corresponding author.
E-mail address: rdriscol@oe.fau.edu (F.R. Driscoll).
1
Department of Mechanical, Materials, and Aerospace Engineering, University of Central Florida,
P.O. Box 162450, Orlando, FL 32816, USA.
2
Launch Point Technologies, 5735 Hollister Avenue, Suite B, Goleta, CA 93117, USA.

0029-8018/$ - see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2005.10.005
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1486 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

0.030 m/s when the pitch is xed at 41. The maximum descent rates of the C-Plane are 0.018 m/
s when the pitch is held at 01 and 0.031 m/s if the pitch is held at
41.
r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Ocean energy; Tethered marine systems; Ocean current turbine; C-plane; Underwater vehicle
modeling

1. Introduction

In the search for a nonpolluting renewable energy source, there is a push to nd an

economical way to harness energy from the ocean. There are several different forms
of ocean energy that are being investigated as potential sources for power generation.
These ocean energies include ocean thermal energy (Vega, 2002; Ravindran and
Abraham, 2002; Hay et al., 1992; Heydt, 1993; Tanner, 1995), wave energy
(Neelamani, 2002; Pontes et al., 2002; McCormick and Kraemer, 2002; Czitrom
et al., 2002), offshore wind energy (Braginton-Smith, 2002), tidal energy (Ullman,
2002), and ocean current energy (Raye, 2001; Von Arx et al., 1974; Venezia and
Holt, 1995). Ocean kinetic (current) energy is an environmentally friendly form of
ocean energy where ocean currents can be used to turn rotors to produce electricity
in much the same way that windmills capture wind energy.
There are many locations throughout the worlds oceans where sustained currents
are found and these currents vary in intensity, persistency, and accessibility. One of
the most easily accessible, persistent, and intense ocean currents is the Gulf Stream
alongshore Southeast Florida. This current is trapped between Florida and the
Bahamas so it cannot meander far from shore. Offshore Broward County, this
current has a mean velocity of about 1.5 m/s near the surface. The core of the
Gulf Stream is located about 25 km from shore, where the water is 330 m deep
(Raye, 2001).
Aquantis LLC is developing an ocean current turbine that will use the ocean
currents offshore South Florida to produce electricity. This ocean current turbine,
which is called the C-Plane (Fig. 1), consists of ve major components: (1) variable
pitch and torque rotors, (2) nacelles that house the generators and electronics, (3) a
main wing that produces lift, (4) control surfaces, and (5) a mooring cable. A full-
scale C-Plane will have two rotors with diameters of 30 m. It will have an estimated
energy producing potential of 1.5 MW when operating in a steady current of 1.5 m/s.
The C-Plane is designed to produce base-load electricity that is cost competitive to
presently available thermal generation systems. Utilizing technologies that are
adaptable from existing commercial wind turbine designs, costs increase linearly with
increasing rotor diameter instead of as the cube of the rotor diameter as seen in
ducted turbines. The design embodies a safe, environmentally compatible,
dependable platform for the current turbine generators. In addition, the modular
design is amenable to incremented large array deployment in the Gulf Stream to
meet the growing power needs of the area, and to economically displace older and
more highly polluting generating resources.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1487

Fig. 1. Diagrammatic representation of the C-Plane under normal operating conditions.

The C-Plane is tethered to the sea oor and uses the lift generated by its hydrofoils
to traverse the water column. The current ows parallel to the axis of the rotors,
which turns the rotors and in-line generators that are housed in the nacelles. The
C-Plane is neutrally buoyant and the design is quasi-stable where the forces balance
at all water velocities. Therefore, it requires minimal control surface deection for
changes in water velocity. The Aquantis C-Plane design accomplishes this through
its novel hydrodynamic design that leverages the current instead of ghting it. This
passive stability allows depth adjustment for maximum power generation, surface
maintenance, and evasion of surface events. A eld of these turbines is proposed to
be placed in the Gulf Stream with the electricity being transmitted to shore via
submarine cables.
The velocity of the Gulf Stream offshore Southeast Florida decreases with depth
and has strong tidal and meander components. Thus, one of the major challenges in
designing an ocean current turbine is positioning it in such a strong temporally and
spatially varying current, while keeping water ow nearly parallel to the rotor axes.
It is important that the C-Plane is able to do this over a wide range of depths and
water velocities. The system must also operate below marine trafc, yet have the
ability to surface for repairs or dive to avoid extreme events such as hurricanes.
Furthermore, it must be capable of changing depth so that it operates where the
current velocity is such that the rotors can effectively extract maximum energy from
the available ow eld.
When optimizing the design of the C-Plane to meet performance constraints, it is
necessary to predict design behavior and quantify the effects of design changes.
However, the differential equations governing its motion are nonlinear and coupled,
thus nding a closed-form solution without linearization is difcult if not impossible.
Therefore, to optimize the C-Plane conguration, analyze its performance, and
develop and tune controllers, a mathematical model and computer-based simulation
are constructed. Development and tuning of control systems are presented in part
two of this paper (VanZwieten et al., 2005).
Many different methods are used to separately model tethered systems and
systems where ight dynamics are important. However, there are few models that
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1488 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

have been constructed to model tethered vehicles in water where ight dynamics are
important. Wu and Chwang (2000) constructed a three-dimensional model of a two-
part towed system. In this model, the governing equations of motion of the cables
are based on the work of Ablow and Schechter (1983), whose implicit six-degrees-of-
freedom equations of motion for submarine simulations are adopted to predict the
hydrodynamic performance of the towed vehicle. Buckham et al. (2003) describe the
development of a numerical model that accurately captures the dynamics of a towed
mine hunting system. They use a lumped-mass approximation for the tow cable and
couple this model to nonlinear numerical models of an autonomous surface vehicle
and an actively controlled tow sh. Lambert et al. (2003) present the validation of a
three-dimensional dynamics model of a towed underwater vehicle system and
discusses the application of the model to improve the performance of the system.
Comparing its results to experimental sea trial data as well as another independently
developed simulation validated this model.
Cables are a dominant structural mechanism and signicantly affect the response
of moored underwater systems. Existing cable models include a three-dimensional,
rigid, lumped parameter model (Kamman et al., 1989); a one-dimensional elastic
nite-element lumped-mass model (Driscoll et al., 2000); a three-dimensional nite-
element model with linear elastic elements (Radanovic, 2002); a third-order nite-
element weighted residue model that provides a representation of both bending and
torsion affects (Buckham et al., 2004a); and a nite-element model that makes use
of twisted cubic spline elements with torsional stiffness and a lumped-mass
approximation (Buckham et al., 2004b). Kamman et al. (1989) developed a three-
dimensional nite-segment model that lumps the systems physical parameters and
the external forces at the connecting joints for modeling the dynamics of a towed
cable system. Driscoll et al. (2000) present a one-dimensional nite-element lumped-
mass model of a vertically tethered caged ROV system subject to surface excitation.
Using this model, the motion of the cage and the tension on the tether at the ship are
calculated. Radanovic (2002) develops a general numeric model to calculate the
response of the underwater cable that connects the Lockheed Martin remote mine
hunting vehicle to its variable depth sensor. Their cable model uses three degrees of
freedom and continuous cable equations that are discretized using a nite-element
method with linear elastic elements. Buckham et al. (2004a) developed a nite-
element cable model that includes the affect of the cables bending and torsional
stiffness to accurately simulate the motion of stack marine cables. Discretized
motion equations are developed for the computationally efcient and novel third-
order nite-element that uses a weighted residue approach. Buckham et al. (2004b)
use a twisted cubic spline to explore the role of torsional stiffness in the simulated
low tension to capture the complete dynamics of a low tension tether. Collectively,
these works provide sufcient cable modeling capabilities and demonstrate that
accuracy can be achieved with discrete models.
The C-Plane has several airfoils, which can be modeled in a similar manner to
the lifting surfaces in aircrafts. Cooke et al. (1994) give a general method for
developing aircraft mathematical models and simulations. Cooke et al. (1994)
developed the lift, drag, and side forces on an aircraft and the gyroscopic and
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1489

thrust moments caused by the engines. Garza and Morelli (2003) developed
nonlinear computer simulations for several different aircrafts. These aircrafts were
considered to be rigid bodies with deectable control surfaces. In these simulations,
the aerodynamics, propulsion, and gravity were used to calculate the forces and
moments on the aircrafts.
Hydrodynamic forces are inuential in the dynamics of the C-Plane along with
gravitational and buoyancy forces. Existing underwater vehicle simulations give
methods for modeling these. Schjolberg and Fossen (1994) present a general method
for modeling marine vehicles that takes into account many forces that are
encountered by an un-tethered underwater vehicle. These forces include: added
mass, coriolis and centripetal, hydrodynamic lift and damping, gravity and
buoyancy, propulsion, and current-induced disturbances. Evans and Nahon (2004)
developed dynamic models for two congurations of an AUV where the external
forces acting on the vehicle such as haul and control plane hydrodynamic forces are
determined for the full 360o angle of attack range. In these models, the
hydrodynamic ns are used to direct the vehicle. They rely on forward motion to
generate the lift forces on these ns required to change orientation. The combined
works of the aforementioned aircraft, underwater vehicle, and cable modeling
provide a signicant base to build a dynamics model of the C-Plane.
1
The C-Plane is in its preliminary design phase that includes the creation of a 30 th
scale physical model (Fig. 2) scaled using the Froude number to maintain dynamic
1
similarity. Modeling the 30 th scale prototype is the focus of this work. In Section 2,

1
Fig. 2. Aquantis 30th scale C-Plane prototype in position for a tow test.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1490 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

the three-dimensional mathematical model of the C-Plane and cable are developed.
The C-Plane is approximated as a rigid body with moveable control surfaces and
variable pitch rotors. The cable is modeled as three linear elastic sections. A method
of nding equilibrium positions of the C-Plane for specied control surface
deections is presented in Section 3. In Section 4, a dynamics simulation is used to
simulate the open-loop response of the C-Plane in different states and environ-
mental conditions. Section 5 summarizes the work and gives some concluding
remarks.

2. Mathematical modeling

1
A three-dimensional mathematical model of the 30 th scale C-Plane prototype is
created to quantify and evaluate the performance of the C-Plane and to aid in the
development of suitable position and control methodology. The C-Plane system is
modeled as a rigid body attached to a mooring or tow point by an elastic cable
consisting of three elements. It models the forces, which consists of gravitational,
buoyancy, hydrodynamic, cable, gyroscopic, and inertial forces on all the
components, and allows the control surfaces, which are the wingtips and canard,
along with the rotors, to vary their pitch.

2.1. Coordinate systems and kinematics

In the creation of the mathematical model, the body, FB (represented as lower-case

characters), and inertial, FI (represented as upper-case characters), reference frames
are developed to dene the vehicles orientation relative to the earth (Fossen, 1994
and Cooke et al., 1994) (Fig. 3). Capitalized variables denote terms in the inertial
frame and lower-case variables denote terms in the body xed frame. The inertial
coordinate system has its origin at the point where the cable attaches to the sea oor.
The X coordinate points northward, the Z direction is positive downward, and the
1
Y direction is chosen according to the right-hand rule. The 30 th scale prototype is to
be steadily towed for testing. In this case, the origin of FI is at the tow point and
X points in the direction of towing. The body xed coordinate system is xed to
the C-Plane at its center of gravity. The x direction points toward the front of the
vehicle, the z direction points downward, and the y direction points toward the
starboard side of the C-Plane.
The cable xed reference frames, FC, are used to calculate the forces on the cable
elements. These frames are attached to each cable element with one tangential
component, t^, and two normal components, n, ^ Each cable element is straight and
^ b.
has two nodes, one at each end, denoted as nodes a and b. The tangential component
of this reference frame points from node a to b and the normal components are
perpendicular to t^ and perpendicular to each other.
The hydrofoil xed reference frames, FH, are used to orient the force on the
hydrofoils in the extreme conditions of stall. These reference frames have their
origins on the quarter cord lines of the hydrofoils. The x direction of this frame
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1491

Fixed portion of wing

Y direction in the
body fixed frame
Wing tip
Port
nacelle

X direction in
Canard
the body
fixed frame

Cable Yoke

Y direction in the
Inertial frame

Tow Carriage

X direction in the
Inertial frame

Fig. 3. Diagrammatic representation of the C-Plane showing the body and inertial coordinate systems.

points along the cord towards the front of the hydrofoil, the y direction is parallel to
the y-axis of the body xed coordinate system, and the z direction completes the
right-hand rule.
Vectors are transferred from the body to inertial coordinate system by pre-
multiplying the body xed vector by the orthogonal matrix LIB. The method chosen
by Fossen (1994) and Cooke et al. (1994) using Euler angles with three successive
rotations about the z-axis (c-yaw), y-axis (y-pitch), and x-axis (f-roll) is adopted.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1492 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

The pitching of the C-Plane is much less than 901 and the singularity at this point is
avoided.
Vectors, such as the force vector, are transformed from the inertial frame to the
body xed frame using the inverse of LIB, and using the orthogonality of LIB. We
have

f LIB
1 F LIB T F LBI F: (1)

The angular rates o p; q; rT , where p, q, and r are the angular velocities about
the x-, y-, and z-axis, respectively, do not constitute a vector space and therefore
their integration is meaningless. Thus, to integrate the angular velocities, the angular
rates must rst be converted into Euler rates b_ f;_ y;
_ c
_ T , which are related to the
angular rates using (Etkin, 1972)

b_ T IB x; (2)

with
2 3
1 sinf tany cosf tany
6
sin f 7
T IB 4 0 cosf 5.
0 sinf secy cosf secy

The orientation of the cable xed coordinate systems, FC, with respect to the
inertial frame for each cable element is also represented using an Euler angle set. The
torsion of the cable is not considered in the simulation and only two of the three
Euler angles are required to specify the orientation of each cable element. These
angles are calculated as suggested by Radanovic (2002),

b a 
b 

1 X
X
1 Y
Ya
yC tan ; fC sin
; cc 0, (3)
Zb
Za lc

where cC 0 because the torsion of the cable is not considered, X a ; Y a ; Z a T is the

position of cable node a, X b ; Y b ; Z b T is the position of cable node b, and lc is the
stretched length of the cable between these two nodes.
In this three-dimensional mathematical model, there are 18 independent states
that dene the system. These states are dened using both FB and FI and are the
translational velocity of the C-Planes center of gravity u, the angular velocity of
the C-Plane x, the Euler angles b, the position of the center of gravity of the C-Plane
PCG X ; Y ; ZT , the velocity of the cable yoke U y X_ y ; Y_ y; Z_ y T , and the
position of the cable yoke Py X y ; Y y ; Z y T . The yoke is the joining point of the
two cables attached to the C-Planes nacelles with the cable attached to the sea oor
(tow carriage) (Fig. 3). There are no angles or angular rates needed to dene the
orientation of the cable yoke because it is approximated with a point mass connected
to linear cable elements (Radanovic, 2002). The deections of the control surfaces
are not considered states, but instead are left as control inputs. Combining the states
of these two bodies yields the states of the entire system being modeled. Collectively,
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1493

the total state vector is

2 3
u
6 x 7
6 7
6 7
6 PCG 7
6 7
X6 7.
6 b 7
6 7
6 Uy 7
4 5
Py

2.2. Equations of motion

Taking advantage of the fact that the body xed coordinate system is dened at
the center of gravity, the linear accelerations u_ are (Fossen, 1994)
f
u_ u  x; (4)
m
where m is the mass of the C-Plane and f is the total force vector acting on the
C-Plane. Similarly, the angular accelerations, x,_ are (Fossen, 1994)
0 2 310
1 1
I z
I y q  r Ix
B 6 I
I r  p 7CB C
I
1 C
_ @m
4 x
x z 5 AB
@ y A, (5)
I y
I x p  q I
1
z

where m is the vector of applied moments acting at the center of gravity of the
C-Plane and I is the moment of inertia tensor about the center of gravity of the
C-Plane. Finally, the acceleration of the cable yoke in the inertial coordinate system,
_ y , is found by dividing the force on the yoke, Fy, by the mass of the yoke, my,
U
_ y F y =my .
U (6)

2.3. Forces on the C-Plane

The forces on the C-Plane are broken down into the gravitational, buoyancy,
hydrodynamic, cable, gyroscopic, and inertial forces. The gravitational and
buoyancy forces both act along the inertial Z-axis and are treated together.
Representations for all other forces and moments are developed separately.

2.3.1. Gravitational and buoyant forces

The gravity and buoyancy forces and moments are
f gb f g f b LBI F G LBI F B , (7)

mgb l CG=CB  f b , (8)

 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1494 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

where
F G 0 0 m  gT ; F B 0 0
BT T ,
and where l CG=CB is the vector from the center of gravity to the center of buoyancy,
mgb is the moment vector due to gravity and buoyancy, FB is the buoyancy vector,
FG is the gravitational vector, g is the magnitude of the earth gravitational
acceleration, and BT is the magnitude of the total buoyancy force.

2.3.2. Hydrodynamic, control, and propulsive forces

The C-Plane translates and rotates in the current during normal operation, to
perform tasks such as changing depth or in response to external disturbances. Since
the full scale C-Plane is large, small angular velocities of the rigid body can impart
signicant local linear velocities far from the center of gravity. Thus, the water
velocity relative to each component must be calculated to obtain accurate
hydrodynamic force estimates. The local velocities of various components on the
C-Plane are calculated, and from this, the relative velocity of the component with
respect to the water urel is calculated using
urel u x  l CG=cf
j, (9)
where j is the water velocity (current velocity) and lCG/cf is the vector from the center
of gravity of the C-Plane to the location where the hydrodynamic force of the
component is applied.

2.3.2.1. Hydrofoil forces. The addition of hydrofoils adds an extra level of

complexity to the model because the effects of stall must be represented. Although
under ideal conditions, all hydrofoils will not stall, extreme environmental
conditions, emergency maneuvers, or maximum control can easily cause one or
more hydrofoils to stall. Thus, both stalled and un-stalled hydrofoil behavior must
be modeled to obtain accurate motion predictions. In this work, the behaviors of
stalled and un-stalled hydrofoils are separately modeled.
Under operating conditions where the hydrofoils are not stalled, the coefcients of
drag, Cd, lift, Cl, and moment, Cm, are taken from the NACA 65_618 airfoil curves
at a Reynolds number of 3  106. These curves have a nonstalled angle of attack
from
221 to 221, and the lift, drag, and moment are
2 3 2 3
L C l a
6 D 7 1 2 6 C a 7
4 5 rw Aurel
xz 4 d 5, (10)
2
m0:25c C m a
where the angle of attack (Fig. 4) and relative water speed are

rel  q

1 ux rel 2 rel 2
a tan y H and u xz urel
x uz ,
urel
z
and where rw is the density of water, A is the hydrodynamic area of the hydrofoil, a
is the relative angle of attack between the hydrofoil and the water velocity, yH is the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1495

Fig. 4. Representation of how the angle of attack of the hydrofoils is calculated.

pitch of the hydrofoil with respect to the body xed coordinate system, urel x is the
relative water velocity in the x direction, and urel
z is the relative water velocity in the z
direction. Since lift is dened as the force perpendicular to urel, and drag is dened
parallel and in the opposite direction as urel, it is necessary to rotate these quantities
into the body xed frame. The forces and moments in FB are
 
L
f h
LB=LD , (11)
D

mh m0:25c
f h  l CG=cf , (12)

where the rotation matrix LB/LD is
2 3

sina
yH cosa
yH
6 7
LB=LD 64
0 0 7,
5
cosa
yH sina
yH

and where lCG/cf is the distance from the center of gravity of the C-Plane to the
center of force on the hydrofoil and m0.25c is the moment vector about the quarter
cord line.
The hydrofoils are assumed to behave as at plates when they are stalled and the
forces and moments are calculated by separating the drag into normal and tangential
components. Thus, the forces on the hydrofoil in the hydrofoil xed frame FH are
2 t 3
C dfp urel rel
Hx juHx j
6 7
fH 6 0 7,
h
0:5rw A4 5 (13)
n rel rel
C dfp uHz juHz j

where C tdfp and C ndfp are the drag coefcients for a ow tangential normal to a at
plate, respectively, and urel rel rel
Hx and uHz are the x and z components of uH . The relative
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1496 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

velocity of the hydrofoil in FH is

urel rel
H LH=B u , (14)
where LH/B is the transformation matrix from FB to FH with fH cH 0 and where
yH is the deection of the hydrofoil with respect to the body xed coordinate system.
Finally, the forces and moments in FB are

f h LB=H f H
h, (15)

mh
f h  l CG_cl . (16)
When a uid ows over a wing, a difference in pressure between the top and
bottom of the wing is created. If the hydrofoil is of nite length, then a ow is
induced around the wingtips from the high pressure to low pressure (Kundu and
Cohen, 2002). This ow is responsible for decreasing the pressure difference, and
thus, decreasing the lift on the wing. To account for this three-dimensional effect, the
hydrodynamic areas of the hydrofoils are calculated. Using the hydrodynamic area
of a wing instead of the actual area of the wing, the three-dimensional hydrodynamic
characteristics of the wing can be obtained using two-dimensional airfoil
characteristics.
For a three-dimensional hydrofoil, the hydrodynamic area is calculated using the
formula for a wing of nite length (McCormick, 1979)
AR
A bh c , (17)
AR 4
AR 2
AR 2
with
AR bh =c (18)
where AR is the aspect ratio of the hydrofoil, bh is the span of the hydrofoil, and c is
the cord of the hydrofoil. The hydrodynamic areas of the wing, wingtips, and canard
are calculated using (17) and (18).

2.3.2.2. Rotor forces. The rotor blades are used to transform the ocean kinetic
(current) energy into mechanical energy that is then transformed into electricity. This
process generates large loads on the C-Plane structure. Because the uidrotor
interaction is complicated and the resulting rotor forces must be accurately
calculated, computational uid dynamics (CFD) methods are used to calculate the
thrust and torque forces. However, CFD calculations are computationally expensive
and the thrust and torque on the rotors are not calculated internally during this
simulation. Instead, the thrust, T, and torque, t, on the rotors are interpolated from
a set of performance tables calculated using CFD methods for the rotor blades used
on the prototype. This set of tables gives the thrust and torque as functions of
relative axial rotor velocity, revolutions per minute (O), and pitch of the rotor blades
ranging between 101 and 141. The propeller RPM (O) is estimated to be a linear
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1497

function of the relative axial water velocity that produces maximum power when the
1
rotor blade tips are pitched 121 and the axial water velocity is 0.25 m/s for the 30 th
scale prototype. Under these conditions, the velocity of the rotor blade tip is 4.605
times that of the axial relative water velocity. The RPM of the rotor blades is
calculated from
60  4:605  jurel
x j
O , (19)
dr  p
where dr is the diameter of the rotor. Using O, the forces that the rotors induce on the
C-Plane are found by
2 3
1
6 urel 7
6 y 7
6 7
f r
Turel 6 urel 7
x ; O6 xy 7. (20)
6 urel 7
4 z 5
urel
xz

The hydrodynamic moments that the rotors induce on the C-Plane are
2 3
turel
x ; O
6 7
mr 4 0 5 l CG=cg  f r , (21)
0

where the positive sign is for the starboard rotor, which rotates positively about the
x-axis and the negative sign is for the port rotor, which rotates negatively about the
x-axis.
The two sets of rotor blades are counter rotating and their gyroscopic moments
cancel. However, when the rotor blades are rotating at different rates, gyroscopic
moments are induced and they are calculated separately for each set of rotor blades.
The gyroscopic force produced by the starboard rotor blade is
2 3
r
Osr
2pI x 6 7
mGsr 4 0 5  o, (22)
60
0
where I rx is the moments of inertia of a rotor about its axis of rotation. The
gyroscopic moment produced by the port rotor is given by the negative of (22)
because the blades are counter rotating,
Osr
Opr .
When the rotor blades are feathered, there is no torque produced and they are
modeled as thin plates with areas parallel to the ow. The force on a feathered rotor
blade is calculated as
1
f rx
rw At C tdfp urel rel
x jux j, (23)
2
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1498 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

where the full area of the rotor blades is


dr
At nrb crb ,
2
nrb is the number of rotor blades, dr is the diameter of the rotor, and crb is the cord of
the rotor blades.

2.3.2.3. Nacelle forces. The nacelles are large streamline bodies that house the
electronics, gear boxes, and power generators. The nacelle drag is modeled by
dividing the total drag into normal and tangential components. Thus, there are two
different hydrodynamic areas that must be considered. For a tangential ow, the
frontal projected area, Af, is used and for a normal ow, the side projected area, As,
is used. The nacelles are modeled as ellipsoids and the forces and moments are
2 3
Af C td urel rel
x jux j
6 7
f n
0:5rw 6 A C n urel jurel j 7
4 s d y y 5, (24)
n rel rel
As C d uz juz j

mn l CG=cg  f n . (25)
where C td
is the tangential drag coefcient, C nd
is the normal drag coefcient, fn is the
vector of forces on the nacelle, and mn is the vector of moments on the nacelle.

2.3.3. Cable forces

The cables used to tether the C-Plane to the sea oor (tow carriage) are modeled as
three distinct sections (Fig. 5). These cable sections are dened as the cable from the
tow point to the cable yoke (main cable), from the cable yoke to the port nacelle

Fig. 5. Diagrammatic representation of the C-Plane cabled to the sea oor showing the three cable
sections and their reference frames.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1499

(port cable), and from the cable yoke to the starboard nacelle (starboard cable). Each
section is modeled as being straight, with the position and velocity of the nodes
dened by the orientation and velocity of the C-Plane, the position and velocity of the
cable yoke, and the location where the cable attaches to the ocean oor (tow mount).
The cables are approximated as linear elastic nite elements with their masses
lumped at the cable nodes. The force on a cable node are found in FC using
(Radanovic, 2002)
EAc Cc lc
fCc BC s D B C s
rw d c Dc
lc lc 4
2  T
d lc
LCI rc
rw gp c 0 0 1 0 0 1 , 26
4 2
where
h iT h iT
s 0 0 sat 0 0 sbt ; f C c
f an f ab f at f bn f bb f bt ,
2 3
0 0 0 0 0 0
60 0 0 0 0 0 7
6 7
6 7
60 0
1 0 0 1 7
BC 6
60
7,
6 0 0 0 0 0 7
7
6 7
40 0 0 0 0 0 5
0 0 1 0 0
1
2 3
van
 C cn f n var 2 p 

6 van 2 vab 2 7
6 7
6 c van 7
6 C n f n var 2 p 7
6 van 2 vab 2 7
6 7
6 C cn f t var jvar j 7
6 7
Dc 6 
6 C c f vb 2 p 7 ,
7
b
vn
6 n n r b 2 b 2 7
6 vn vb 7
7
6 7
6 c vbn
b 2 p 7
6 C n f n vr 
6 vn vb 7
b 2 b 2
4 5
 C c f t vb jvb j 
n r r

rc is the density of the cable, dc is the diameter of the cable, f C

c is the force on the cable
nodes in the cable frame, Id is a 6  6 identity matrix, s is the cumulative stretch vector,
lc is the unstretched length of the cable element, C cn is the normal drag coefcient, C cD
is the internal damping coefcient, and fn and ft are the normal and tangential
hydrodynamic loading functions. The velocities of the cable nodes in FC are
vn LBI 1; 1X_ LBI 1; 2Y_ LBI 1; 3Z,
_

vb LBI 2; 1X_ LBI 2; 2Y_ LBI 2; 3Z,

_

vt LBI 3; 1X_ LBI 3; 2Y_ LBI 3; 3Z,

_
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1500 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

where LBI i; j is the element of transformation matrix LBI at the ith row and jth
q
column and vr is calculated as vr v2n v2b v2t (Radanovic, 2002). The force on the
cable nodes a and b can be transformed into fI by
 a " #
F LIC 0
fC, (27)
Fb 0 LIC c

where Fa is the net force on node a and Fb is the net force on node b.

3. Equilibrium solutions

Design of the C-Plane requires that all control and lifting surfaces are
appropriately sized and located to meet performance and control requirements.
Doing this with a dynamics simulation is often time consuming because such
simulations are computationally expensive and take long periods of time to converge
to an equilibrium solution where all transients are damped out. Thus, an
optimization routine is used to solve for static (equilibrium) states of the equations
of motion.
The equilibrium states for this multi-input multi-output system are calculated for
constant water velocity and constant rotor blade deection. Solutions are found for
specied values of depth, pitch, roll, and yaw with the Y locations of the C-Plane and
cable yoke set to zero. The remaining unknown position states and the control
surfaces deections that satisfy the equations of motion with zero acceleration are
found. An equilibrium solution is determined by minimizing the equation of motion
of the form a F=m and a cost function is developed in the form
J vQvT , (28)
where
_ w;
v u; _ n y ; ty 
_ q; and Q diagg11 ; g22 ; g33 ; g44 ; g55 .
v is the vector of variables that are to be minimized, n y and ty are the normal and
tangential accelerations of the cable yoke in the xz-plane, and Q is a positive
diagonal matrix. This cost function can also be represented in the nonmatrix
mathematical form
2
J g11 u_ 2 g22 w_ 2 g33 q_ 2 g44 n 2y g55 ty .
The equations of motion are nonlinear and stiff. Therefore, achieving absolute
minimization of all state variables is difcult and computationally expensive. Often,
similar changes in the values of different state variables can result in vastly different
changes in a common dependent state. As a result, the weighting values of each state
must be carefully selected in the Q matrix to allow efcient routine stepping. Thus,
the diagonal values of the Q matrix are proportional to the desired minimization
level of the corresponding accelerations. An equilibrium solution is found when the
cost function is within a specied tolerance of zero. Selecting the orientation of local
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1501

frames of reference is also very important. For example, if the inertial X and Z
position of the cable yoke is selected as state variables, then the stiff tangential cable
response and the nonstiff normal response will be coupled. Choosing the local frame
of reference decouples the normal and tangential forces and improves the accuracy
on the order of 104, achieving this result in approximately the same time as using the
X and Z directions. The largest state accelerations accepted were less than 10
4 (m/s2
or rad/s2).
Using this technique, the depth ranges for several different congurations are
compared. Several modied congurations are iteratively tested to nd the root
angle of the main wing and the cable attachment points that allow the C-Plane to
achieve a height range from 3.0 to 5.4 (90 to 162) m with the smallest possible control
surfaces. This technique placed the cable attachment points 0.15 m in front of the
trailing edge of the main wing and found the root angle of the main wing to be 2.61.
The wing tips that were selected had an average cord of 0.12 m and a length of 0.5 m
and the canard had an average cord of 0.13 m.

4. Dynamics simulation

A dynamics simulation is created to evaluate the C-Plane performance. This

simulation uses the forces and moments acting on the C-Plane to calculate the states
of the entire system (Fig. 6). To accomplish this, forces and moments calculated on
the individual components are used to nd the total force and moment on the
C-Plane in FB. The accelerations found from these forces and moments are then
integrated to yield the linear and angular velocities in FB, which are half of the states
of the system. These linear velocities are converted to FI using LIB while the angular
velocities are converted to Euler rates using TIB. The linear velocities in FI and the
Euler rates are integrated to yield the position states and Euler angles, which are
the remaining states of the system. Using these states, the orientation and position of
the C-Plane system is dened.
The set of equations of motion for the C-Plane system are stiff. Stiffness occurs in
a problem where there are two or more very different scales of the independent
variable on which the dependent variables are changing (Press et al., 1992). Since the
cable force on the C-Plane generated by small axial displacement is much larger than
the force on the C-Plane for an equivalent transverse displacement, stiffness is
encountered when integrating this simulation with respect to time. An integration
routine based on the modied Rosenbrock formula of order 2 is chosen because it
efciently handles this stiffness when integrating (Lindeld and Penny, 1999).
To minimize start-up transients, the initial states are chosen to reduce/eliminate
the initial acceleration on the C-Plane. If the initial cable forces are much larger than
the hydrodynamic forces on the C-Plane, initial oscillations and possibly snap
loading may result. This is computationally expensive and slows down the
simulation until the C-Plane nears equilibrium. To minimize the initial acceleration,
equilibrium solutions are found at several different heights (see Section 3) and these
solutions are used as initial conditions.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1502 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

Inertial
Forces LBI
FI
Governing u v w
Force Eqns dt
Body Fixed
f = ma uvw
Forces
fB LIB

x y z

dt

x y z




dt



Inertial
T
Moments LBI
TI pq r
Governing
Moment Eqns dt
Body Fixed
 = I p q r
Moments
B

Fig. 6. A diagram showing the base structure of the dynamics simulation. The applied forces and
moments are used to calculate the derivatives of the state variables, which in turn are integrated to yield
the state variables.

4.1. Open-loop performance

Three methods are used to analyze the open-loop performance of the C-Plane.
These methods test the stability, dynamics, and the response of the C-Plane. These
tests include:

1. The eigenvalues of the linearized open-loop dynamics in the neighborhood of the

equilibrium positions corresponding to several different heights above the sea
oor.
2. Depth changing using open-loop coordinated (multiple/single) control surface
deection.
3. Maximum individual control surface deection.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1503

The C-Plane has two modes of operation, the null and active modes. The active
mode, which is used under normal operating conditions, has the rotor blades pitched
to produce electricity and uses its control surfaces to y level into the oncoming
current. For null mode, the rotor blades are feathered. It is used when the water
velocity is too slow to economically produce electricity, if the C-Plane has a failure,
or when the C-Plane is surfacing for maintenance or repairs. In null mode, the rotor
drag force is reduced and the C-Plane must pitch nose down to reduce lift to
maintain a static balance of forces. The null and active modes are both analyzed
using the open-loop eigenvalues and depth changing analysis, while only the active
mode is tested using the maximum individual control surface deection analysis.
1
All simulations were carried out for the 30 th scale prototype. However, to assist in
understanding the response for the full-scale system, corresponding values for the
full-scale C-Plane are given in brackets after the results from the mathematical model
1
of the 30 th scale prototype. The full-scale C-Plane performance is estimated by
1
scaling the performance quantities of the 30th scale prototype
p p to full scale using
the Froude number (Frm Frp ) or V m = gm Lm V p = gp Lp where, ()m indicates
the model and ()p indicates the full-scale prototype. Using the Froude number, the
1
distance, velocity,
p
acceleration,
p and time for the 30 th scale prototype are multiplied
by 30; 30;1; and 30, respectively, to estimate the performance of the full-scale
prototype.

4.1.1. Eigenvalues
The eigenvalues of the open-loop response of the C-Plane provide a measure of the
system stability and damping. The linearized open-loop response of the C-Plane
system is characterized using the A matrix, which is the Jacobian of the states of the
system. The eigenvalues, s, of the A matrix are the characteristic roots of the state
equations, X_ AX (Palm, 2000), and are found using the roots of the characteristic
equation of the system (Kuo, 1995)
jsI
Aj 0. (29)
Eigenvalues can have real and imaginary parts and are denoted by (Rao, 1995)
sj bj ioj .
If the real parts of all of the eigenvalues are negative, the system is stable at that
particular location (Banks, 1999). If an eigenvalue is real (oj 0) and negative, then
that mode is over damped (Bolton, 1998). These modes are stable and have a
decaying time function ebj t (Rao, 1995). Pairs of complex conjugate eigenvalues arise
from under damped second-order vibrations and the natural frequency of each mode
is (Bolton, 1998)
p
on b2 o2 , (30)
with a damping ratio of

b
z . (31)
on
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1504 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

The eigenvalues of the C-Plane are found using a water speed of 0.3 (1.6) m/s at
the characteristic height range in which the C-Plane operates which is 3.5 (105), 4
(120), 4.5 (135), and 5 (150) m in both active (Table 1) and null (Table 2) modes. The
eigenvalues are also found at the same heights, but with a water speed of 0.15
(0.8) m/s for null mode (Table 3). The real parts of the eigenvalues of the open-loop
response for active mode (Table 1) are all negative, showing the system is stable at
these locations in active mode. Open-loop stability is important so that the C-Plane
can maintain the desired position and orientation without constantly changing the
control surface deections. The modes of oscillation when operating in active mode
range from very minimal damping to over damped, which is measured by the
imaginary parts of the eigenvalues. The real parts of the eigenvalues of the open-loop
response for null mode (Tables 2 and 3) are not all negative. This suggests that the
system may become unstable when it is operated in null mode. This potential
instability occurs because the drag force from the rotors is greatly reduced when the
C-Plane is operating in null mode. The large drag force from the rotors is responsible
for increasing the damping and stabilizing the active mode.

4.1.2. Depth changing

To analyze the open-loop dynamics of the system, two tests are conducted in
active mode. In these tests, the control surface deections are changed using step

Table 1
Eigenvalues of the open-loop C-Plane system operating in active mode with the water speed of 0.3 m/s at
heights above the sea oor of 3.5 (105), 4.0 (120), 4.5 (135), and 5.0 (150) m

H 3.5 (m) H 4.0 (m) H 4.5 (m) H 5.0 (m)

1.0e+002

2.6499+9.9393i
2.6499+9.9394i
2.6500+9.9395i
2.6501+9.9396i

2.6499
9.9393i
2.6499
9.9394i
2.6500
9.9395i
2.6501
9.9396i

0.3199+3.3916i
0.3200+3.3919i
0.3202+3.3922i
0.3205+3.3925i

0.3199
3.3916i
0.3200
3.3919i
0.3202
3.3922i
0.3205
3.3925i

0.0764+0.6054i
0.0759+0.6057i
0.0766+0.6058i
0.0772+0.6060i

0.0764
0.6054i
0.0759
0.6057i
0.0766
0.6058i
0.0772
0.6060i

0.2104
0.1570
0.1556
0.1540

0.1606
0.0707
0.0915
0.0934

0.0003+0.0401i
0.0004+0.0403i
0.0003+0.0404i
0.0003+0.0405i

0.0003
0.0401i
0.0004
0.0403i
0.0003
0.0404i
0.0003
0.0405i

0.1083
0.0986+0.0018i
0.0982+0.0064i
0.0985+0.0097i

0.0954
0.0986
0.0018i
0.0982
0.0064i
0.0985
0.0097i

0.0421
0.0185
0.0147
0.0442

0.0055
0.0424
0.0432
0.0141

0.0122
0.0121
0.0119
0.0117

0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001

0.0007
0.0007
0.0007
0.0007

0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
 denotes all of the values on the table should be multiplied by a factor of 100.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1505

Table 2
Eigenvalues of the open-loop C-Plane system operating in null mode with the water speed of 0.3 m/s at
heights above the sea oor of 3.5 (105), 4.0 (120), 4.5 (135), and 5.0 (150) m

H 3.5 (m) H 4.0 (m) H 4.5 (m) H 5.0 (m)

y
8 (deg) y
8 (deg) y
8 (deg) y
8 (deg)

1.0e+002

4.0211
4.0215
4.0220
4.0225

0.6481+0.2822i
0.6492+0.2853i
0.6504+0.2886i
0.6517+0.2922i

0.6481
0.2822i
0.6492
0.2853i
0.6504
0.2886i
0.6517
0.2922i

0.5871
0.5873
0.5876
0.5879

0.1860
0.1839
0.1816
0.1792

0.0175+0.0163i
0.0172+0.0165i
0.0170+0.0167i
0.0167+0.0170i

0.0175
0.0163i
0.0172
0.0165i
0.0170
0.0167i
0.0167
0.0170i

0.0385
0.0382
0.0380
0.0377

0.0000+0.0018i
0.0000+0.0018i
0.0000+0.0018i
0.0000+0.0018i

0.0000
0.0018i
0.0000
0.0018i
0.0000
0.0018i
0.0000
0.0018i

0.0022
0.0022
0.0022
0.0022

0.0011+0.0012i
0.0011+0.0012i
0.0011+0.0012i
0.0011+0.0012i

0.0011
0.0012i
0.0011
0.0012i
0.0011
0.0012i
0.0011
0.0012i

0.0000+0.0008i
0.0000+0.0008i
0.0000+0.0008i
0.0000+0.0008i

0.0000
0.0008i
0.0000
0.0008i
0.0000
0.0008i
0.0000
0.0008i

0.0000+0.0000i 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000

0.0000
0.0000i 0.0000
0.0000 0.0000

0.0000
0.0000 0.0000
0.0000
 denotes all of the values on the table should be multiplied by a factor of 100.

inputs and the C-Plane is allowed to settle to an equilibrium orientation. For these
tests, the C-Plane is started at an equilibrium condition and then the control surfaces
are deected to positions that correspond to an equilibrium solution at a different
depth. After a period of time, the control surfaces are once again deected to
positions that represent an equilibrium deection at yet another depth. The C-Plane
is then allowed to settle to the new equilibrium depth.
The water speed is 0.3 (1.6) m/s and the C-Plane is in active mode for both of these
tests with the control surface deections for Test 1 set to 9.01 and 3.51 for the canard
and wingtips, respectively, for the rst 360 (1972) s and 6.01 and
9.51 for the canard
and wingtips, respectively, for the remaining 360 (1972) s. The control surface
deections for Test 2 are 8.21 and
0.91 for the canard and wingtips, respectively, for
the rst 360 (1972) s, and 6.01 and 9.51 for the canard and wingtips, respectively, for
the remaining 360 (1972) s. There is no overshoot of the desired heights during these
tests. This indicates that the open-loop response of the C-Plane is overdamped.
During Test 1 (Fig. 7), the initial height is 4 (120) m and it takes 240 (1314) s to settle
to within 0.1 (3) m of the rst equilibrium height, which is 5 (150) m. From an initial
height of nearly 5 (150) m, it takes 300 (1643) s to settle to within 0.1 (3) m of the
second equilibrium height, which is 3.5 (105) m. During Test 2 (Fig. 8), the initial
height is 4 (120) m and it takes 162 (887) s to settle to within 0.1 (3) m of the rst
equilibrium height, which is 4.5 (135) m. From an initial height of nearly 4.5 (135) m,
it takes 262 (1435) s to settle to within 0.1 (3) m of the second equilibrium height,
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1506 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

Table 3
Eigenvalues of the open-loop C-Plane system operating in null mode with the water speed of 0.15 m/s at
heights above the sea oor of 3.5 (105), 4.0 (120), 4.5 (135), and 5.0 (150) m

H 3.5 (m) H 4 (m) H 4.5 (m) H 5 (m)

y
4 (deg) y
4 (deg) y
4 (deg) y
4 (deg)

1.0e+002

4.5728
4.5669
4.5601
4.5525

0.3698+0.3741i
0.3734+0.3750i
0.3774+0.3759i
0.3819+0.3768i

0.3698
0.3741i
0.3734
0.3750i
0.3774
0.3759i
0.3819
0.3768i

0.5879
0.5881
0.5882
0.5884

0.1104
0.1097
0.1089
0.1080

0.0125+0.0188i
0.0124+0.0188i
0.0122+0.0188i
0.0121+0.0189i

0.0125
0.0188i
0.0124
0.0188i
0.0122
0.0188i
0.0121
0.0189i

0.0147
0.0146
0.0145
0.0143

0.0052
0.0052
0.0052
0.0052

0.0000+0.0009i
0.0000+0.0009i
0.0000+0.0009i
0.0000+0.0009i

0.0000
0.0009i
0.0000
0.0009i
0.0000
0.0009i
0.0000
0.0009i

0.0006+0.0006i
0.0006+0.0006i
0.0006+0.0006i
0.0006+0.0006i

0.0006
0.0006i
0.0006
0.0006i
0.0006
0.0006i
0.0006
0.0006i

0.0000+0.0004i
0.0000+0.0004i
0.0000+0.0004i
0.0000+0.0004i

0.0000
0.0004i
0.0000
0.0004i
0.0000
0.0004i
0.0000
0.0004i
0.0000+0.0000i
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000i 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
 denotes all of the values on the table should be multiplied by a factor of 100.

which is 3.5 (105) m. These tests show that if the control surfaces are set to
deections corresponding to an equilibrium position, the C-Plane stably converges to
that position.
Two additional tests are also conducted to analyze the open-loop dynamics of the
system when the C-Plane is operating in null mode. These tests are different from
those conducted in active mode because the equilibrium deections of the control
surfaces differ little over the range of operating depths (Tables 4 and 5). This would
lead to a very slow response at best. Instead, two tests are conducted where the
C-Plane is started at an equilibrium condition and then the canard is deected an
additional 21 at time 0 s. At time 360 s, the canard deection is reduce by 41 for
the remainder of the simulation. For the rst test in null mode (Test 3) (Fig. 9), the
water speed is 0.15 (0.82) m/s and the initial equilibrium pitch and height are
41 and
3.5 (105) m, respectively. The C-Plane ascends 1.13 (33.9) m in the rst 360 (1972) s,
and then descends 1.23 (36.9) m in the remaining 360 (1972) s. For the second test in
null mode (Test 4) (Fig. 10), the water speed is 0.30 (1.64) m/s and the initial
equilibrium pitch and height are
81 and 3.5 (105) m, respectively. The C-Plane
ascends 4.1 (123) m in the rst 360 (1972) s, and then descends 4.48 (134) m in the
remaining 360 (1972) s. These tests show that the C-Plane can dramatically deviate
form its desired location if small disturbances or variations in control surface
deections are encountered when operating in null mode. This lack of stability
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1507

[] 0

-1

-2
0 120 240 360 480 600 720
10
5
Port wingtip
H []

0 Strb wingtip
Canard
-5
-10
0 120 240 360 480 600 720

4.5
H [m]

3.5
0 120 240 360 480 600 720
t [s]

Fig. 7. Test 1, the open-loop dynamics of the C-Plane in active mode. The control surfaces are set to the
deection necessary for an equilibrium solution at a height of 5 m for the rst 360 s. For the last 360 s, the
control surfaces are set to the deections necessary for an equilibrium solution at a height of 3.5 m.

allows the C-Plane to easily change heights when in null mode. This can be useful
when retrieving the system. This lack of stability also makes active control necessary
to accurately position itself.

4.1.3. Extreme step response to control surface deflections

The control surfaces are deected from their equilibrium position to near
maximum lift to analyze the response of the C-Plane under maximum control surface
input. For the rst 10 (55) s of the simulation, the control surfaces are in their
equilibrium positions. After this, one or more control surfaces are deected to
produce near maximum positive and/or negative lift. The remaining control surface
deections are held at their equilibrium deections, which are
5.41,
5.41, and 71
for the port wingtip, starboard wingtip, and canard, respectively. Each simulation is
started at a height of 4 (200) m and with f, y, and c set to 01. Since the C-Plane is
symmetric about the xz-plane, only one wingtip needs to be deected, and the
response is mirrored for the other wingtip deections. Similarly, for simultaneous
wingtip deection, the response is mirrored when the deections are switched to the
opposite wingtips.
These tests are summarized in Table 6, where the deections of the control
surfaces are listed with the maximum (max) and minimum (min) values of the Euler
angles, the immediate angular response and the time it takes to achieve this response,
and the average rate of climb.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1508 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

0.5
[] 0

-0.5

-1
0 120 240 360 480 600 720

10
5
Port wingtip
H []

0 Strb wingtip
Canard
-5
-10
0 120 240 360 480 600 720

4.5
H [m]

3.5
0 120 240 360 480 600 720
t [s]

Fig. 8. Test 2, the open-loop dynamics of the C-Plane in active mode. The control surfaces are set to the
deection necessary for an equilibrium solution at a height of 4.5 m for the rst 360 s. For the last 360 s, the
control surfaces are set to the deections necessary for an equilibrium solution at a height of 3.5 m.

Table 4
Table of open-loop tests that show the C-Plane settling to the new equilibrium positions

Test no. Initial 1st desired 2nd desired 1st 0.1 (m) 2nd 0.1 (m)
height (m) height (m) height (m) settle time (s) settle time (s)

1 4.0 5.0 3.5 240 300

2 4.0 4.5 3.5 162 262

The initial height, two desired heights, and the time it takes to settle to within 0.1 m of the desired
equilibrium heights are given.

In Test 5, the port wingtip is deected positively to near maximum lift (a 161)
(Fig. 11). The C-Plane responds to this deection by rolling to 101 in the rst 15
(82) s, and then settles to a maximum roll of 151. The C-Plane also yaws 21, pitches
0.51, and ascends at 0.046 (0.25) m/s. Positively deecting a single wingtip primarily
affects the roll and height of the C-Plane and has a secondary (coupling) effect on the
yaw and a very small effect on the pitch of the C-Plane. The C-Plane ascends through
the water column because of the added lift from the port wingtip and rolls because
the lift on the port wingtip is greater than the lift on the starboard wingtip.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1509

Table 5
Control surface deections for equilibrium solutions at the specied height, pitch, and water velocity

Height (m) Pitch (deg) Water vel. (m/ Port wt. (deg) Strb wt. (deg) Canard (deg)
s)

5
8
0.3 2.39147 2.39147 6.5857

4.5
8
0.3 2.2972 2.2972 6.5785
4.0
8
0.3 2.2045 2.2045 6.5713
3.5
8
0.3 2.1133 2.1133 6.5643
5
4
0.15
1.4151
1.4151
2.5953
4.5
4
0.15
1.5075
1.5075
2.6017
4.0
4
0.15
1.5981
1.5981
2.6080
3.5
4
0.15
1.6882
1.6882
2.6143

0

-2
[]

-4

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

0
-1
-2
H []

Port wingtip
-3 Strb wingtip
-4 Canard
-5
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

4.5
H [m]

3.5
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
t [s]

Fig. 9. Test 3, the open-loop dynamics of the C-Plane in null mode with a water velocity of 0.15 m/s. The
control surfaces are set to the deection necessary for an equilibrium solution at a height of 3.5 m, except
for the canard, which is deected an additional +21 for the rst 360 s and
21 for the remaining 360 s.

In Test 6, the port wingtip is deected negatively to near maximum negative lift
(a
161) (Fig. 12). The C-Plane responds to this deection by rolling to
61 in the
rst 15 (82) s and settles to
81 with time. The C-Plane also yaws
1.21 and descends
at 0.027 (0.15) m/s. This shows that negatively deecting a single wingtip primarily
affects the roll and height of the C-Plane and slightly couples into the yaw of the
C-Plane. The C-Plane descends through the water column because the lift from the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1510 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

0


[]
-5

-10
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
10

Port wingtip
H []

5 Strb wingtip
Canard

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
8
H [m]

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

t [s]

Fig. 10. Test 4, the open-loop dynamics of the C-Plane in null mode with a water velocity of 0.30 m/s. The
control surfaces are set to the deection necessary for an equilibrium solution at a height of 3.5 m, except
for the canard, which is deected an additional +21 for the rst 360 s and
21 for the remaining 360 s.

port wingtip is decreased and has negative roll because the lift on the port wingtip is
less than the lift on the starboard wingtip.
In Test 7, the port wingtip is deected negatively to near maximum negative lift
(a
161) and the starboard wingtip is deected to near maximum positive lift
(a 161) (Fig. 13). The C-Plane responds to this deection by rolling to
161 in the
rst 15 (82) s and settles to
21.51 with time. The C-Plane also yaws
3.31, pitches
0.51, and descends at 0.01 (0.055) m/s. When the wingtips are deected opposite each
other, a large roll results that couples into yaw. The C-Plane ascends through the
water column because the added lift from the port wingtip is greater than the
decrease in the lift from the starboard wingtip. It rolls negatively because the lift on
the port wingtip is less than the lift on the starboard wingtip.
In Test 8, the port and starboard wingtips are deected positively to near
maximum lift (a 161) (Fig. 14). The C-Plane responds to this deection by pitching
to 0.781 in the rst 5 (27) s and ascending at 0.1 (0.55) m/s. The pitch of the C-Plane
gradually decreases after its initial response because the pitching moment applied by
the cable increases negatively with decreasing depth.
In Test 9, the port and starboard wingtips are deected negatively to near
maximum negative lift (a
161) (Fig. 15). The C-Plane responds to this deection
by descending at 0.05 (0.27) m/s and by pitching to
0.11 in the rst 3 (16) s. The
pitch of the C-Plane gradually increases after its initial response because the pitching
Table 6
Table of open-loop tests, which shows the response of the C-Plane to deecting one or more control surface from its equilibrium deection to either minimum
or maximum lift

Test Port Strb Canard f max y max c max f(t) (deg) (s) y(t) (deg) (s) c(t) (deg) (s) Z_ (m/s)
wingtip wingtip (deg) (deg) (deg)

5 max equ equ 15 0.5 2 10(15) 0.5(3) 1.8(15)
0.0046

6 min equ equ
8 0
1.2
6(15) 0
1(15) 0.0027
7 min max equ
21.5 0.5
3.3
16(15) 0.4(2)
3(15)
0.001
8 max max equ 0 0.78 0 0 0.65(3) 0
0.01
9 min min equ 0 70.1 0 0
0.1(2) 0 0.005
10 equ equ max 0 3 0 0 2.2(1) 0
0.01
11 equ equ min 0
12 0 0
10(1) 0 0.05
ARTICLE IN PRESS

The maximum values of f, y, and c during the run are given along with the immediate f, y, and c response and the time it takes to achieve this response. The
average rate of height change is also given.
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521
1511
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1512 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

10
[]
5

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
20
10
H []

0 Port wingtip
Strb wingtip
-10 Canard
-20
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
4.3
4.2
H [m]

4.1
4
3.9
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
t [s]

Fig. 11. Test 5, the response of the C-Plane in active mode when the port wingtip is deected from
equilibrium to near maximum positive lift at time 10 s. This is done while holding the other control
surfaces at their original equilibrium positions.

moment applied by the cable increases with decreasing depth. The descent rate
induced by maximum negative deection is 0.05 (0.275) m/s, which is half that of the
ascent rate from maximum positive deection at a height of 4 (120) m. This is true
because the wingtips are deected 21.41 from an equilibrium deection of
5.41 to
create maximum lift and
11.61 from equilibrium to create maximum negative lift.
Tests 4 and 5 demonstrate that the wingtips can control the height with a small
secondary effect on the pitch of the C-Plane.
In Test 10, the canard is deected positively to near maximum lift (y yC 161)
(Fig. 16). The C-Plane responds quickly reaching a near steady pitch of 31 in the rst
2 (11) s and an ascent rate of 0.1 (0.55) m/s. The pitch of the C-Plane is primarily
affected and the height is also affected both by the increased lift of the canard and
the additional lift caused by increasing the pitch of the C-Plane.
In Test 11, the canard is deected negatively to near maximum negative lift
(y yC 161) (Fig. 17). The C-Plane responds to this deection by pitching to
121
in the rst 2 (11) s and descending at a rate of 0.5 (2.74) m/s. The magnitude of the
negative pitch induced by this deection is approximately 4 times that of the pitch
caused by the deection that causes maximum positive lift at the same height. This is
true because the canard is initially deected +91 from its equilibrium position of
+71 to create maximum positive lift while it is deected 231 from the same
equilibrium deection to create maximum negative lift. The vertical velocity is
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1513

0
-2
[]
-4
-6
-8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60

20
Port wingtip
10 Strb wingtip
H []

0 Canard

-10
-20
0 10 20 30 40 50 60

4.1

4
H [m]

3.9

3.8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
t [s]

Fig. 12. Test 6, the response of the C-Plane in active mode when the port wingtip is deected from
equilibrium to near maximum negative lift at time 10 s. This is done while holding the other control
surfaces at their original equilibrium positions.

affected both by the decreased lift of the canard and the decreased lift caused
by decreasing the pitch of the C-Plane. The descent rate induced by maximum
negative deection is approximately 5 times that of the ascent rate at a height of
4 (120) m.
The response of the C-Plane to these control surface deections shows that the
wingtips predominantly control the roll and depth of the C-Plane, while the canard
controls the pitch and depth of the C-Plane. It can also be seen that the pitch of the
C-Plane changes rapidly when compared to the roll or the depth of the C-Plane. This
analysis also shows that coupling between the lateral and longitudinal response
exists.

4.2. Hydrofoil stall

One of the characteristics limiting the performance of the C-Plane is the stalling of
its control surfaces. Under normal operating conditions, the greater the angle of
attack, the greater the lift. This is not true when the control surface stalls. When a
control surface stalls, there is a sudden loss in the control force and this abrupt loss
changes the performance of the C-Plane.
The stalling of the canard can cause the C-Plane to abruptly pitch down. This is
demonstrated by deecting the canard to 181. At this deection, the pitch of the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1514 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

0

-10
[]

-20

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

20
10
H []

0 Port wingtip
Strb wingtip
-10 Canard
-20
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
4.1
4.05
H [m]

4
3.95
3.9
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
t [s]

Fig. 13. Test 7, the response of the C-Plane for deecting the port wingtip from equilibrium to near
maximum negative lift and the starboard wingtip to near maximum positive lift at time 10 s. This is done
while the canard is held at its original equilibrium deection.

C-Plane increases until the canard stalls. The canard then oscillates between stalled
and an unstalled conditions, as the C-Plane pitch oscillates as shown in Fig. 18the
VanZwieten mode. This response is partially explained by the angular momentum of
the C-Plane. Once the canard stalls, the angular momentum carries the C-Plane to a
larger pitch. Similarly, angular momentum carries the C-Plane to smaller pitch
angles even once the canard regains lift. A more signicant cause of oscillation is the
effect of the angular pitch velocity on the angle of attack of the canard, aC . This
angular pitch velocity, q, changes aC by as much as 7111 (Fig. 19). When q is
positive, the angle of attack is decreased and the C-Plane can pitch to a greater angle
before canard stall than without q. During this test, positive q allows the C-Plane to
pitch an additional 31 before the canard stalls. When q is negative, the angle of attack
is increased and the C-Plane pitches to a smaller angle before regaining lift than if
q 0. During this test, the negative q causes the C-Plane to pitch an additional
41
before the canard regains lift. This creates a 71 difference between where the canard
regains lift and where the canard stalls. This difference in pitch between stalling and
regaining lift combined with the angular momentum create pitch oscillations of 91.
These transitions between stalled and lift conditions also decreases the height of the
C-Plane, it descends through the water column at an average rate of 0.033 (0.18) m/s
(Fig. 18) instead of remaining at its equilibrium position.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1515

[] 0.5
0

-0.5

-1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
20
10
H []

0 Port wingtip
Strb wingtip
-10 Canard
-20
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
4.6
4.4
H [m]

4.2
4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
t [s]

Fig. 14. Test 8, the response of the C-Plane for deecting both the port and starboard wingtips to near
maximum positive lift at time 10 s. This is done while the canard is held at its original equilibrium
deection.

4.3. One rotor feathered

An extremely unfavorable operating condition occurs when one rotor is in null

mode (feathered) and the other is in active mode. This operating condition should be
avoided but may be experienced when the C-Plane malfunctions or when the two
rotors are not synchronized during switching between modes. The open-loop
performance of the C-Plane under this condition is tested by holding the control
surfaces at their equilibrium deections for level ight at a height of 4 (120) m when
operating in active mode. The port rotor is feathered at time 0 s and the starboard
rotor is held at a deection of 121. The C-Plane performance is simulated for 240
(1315) s at water velocities of 0.3 (1.6) m/s (Fig. 20) and 0.15 (0.8) m/s (Fig. 21). For a
water velocity of 0.3 (1.6) m/s, the C-Plane both rolls and yaws 131 in 24 (131) s and
has a maximum roll and yaw of 781 and 561, respectively. It also ascends through the
water column to a height of 6.0 (180) m in the rst 134 (734) s when the blades reach
the air/water interface. For a water velocity of 0.15 (0.82) m/s, the C-Plane has a
maximum roll and yaw of 4.21 and 12.41, respectively. It also ascends through the
water column and reaches a height of 5.25 (158) m in the rst 240 (1315) s. While the
performance of the C-Plane is erratic when one rotor is feathered, the C-Plane remains
stable and ascends to the surface where it can be retrieved or maintenance can be
performed. This is important because it reduces the risk of loosing the C-Plane.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1516 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

0.2
[] 0.1
0

-0.1

-0.2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60

10
Port wingtip
0 Strb wingtip
H []

Canard
-10

-20
0 10 20 30 40 50 60

4.1
4
H [m]

3.9
3.8
3.7
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
t [s]

Fig. 15. Test 9, the response of the C-Plane for deecting both of the wingtips to near maximum negative
lift at time 10 s. This is done while the canard is held at its original equilibrium deection.

4
3
2
[]

1
0
-1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

20

10 Port wingtip
H []

Strb wingtip
0 Canard

-10
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

4.2
4.1
H [m]

4
3.9
3.8
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
t [s]

Fig. 16. Test 10, the response of the C-Plane for deecting the canard to near maximum positive lift at
time 10 s. This is done while the wingtips are held at their original equilibrium deections.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1517

5
0
[]
-5

-10
-15
-20
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

20
Port wingtip
10 Strb wingtip
H []

0 Canard

-10
-20
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

4
H [m]

3.8

3.6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
t [s]

Fig. 17. Test 11, the response of the C-Plane for deecting the canard to near maximum negative lift at
time 10 s. This is done while the wingtips are held at their original equilibrium deections.

4

2
0
[]

-2

-4

-6
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
4.02
4
3.98
3.96
H [m]

3.94
3.92
3.9
3.88
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
t [s]

Fig. 18. Euler angles and height of the C-Plane showing the effects of canard stall. The canard is deected
181 and the wingtips are held at
5.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1518 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

35
+ C
30
25
, +c []

20
15
10
5
0
0 5 10 15
15
10
5
q [/s]

0
-5
-10
-15
0 5 10 15
t [s]

Fig. 19. Effects of pitch rate (q) on the angle of attack of the canard. To demonstrate this, the angle of
attack of the canard (a), angle of attack of the canard if there were no angular velocity (y yC ), and q are
shown.

80

60
40
[]

20
0
-20
0 50 100 150 200

12
Port wingtip
10 Strb wingtip
H []

8 Canard
6
4
0 50 100 150 200

6
H [m]

0 50 100 150 200

t [s]

Fig. 20. Open-loop performance of the C-Plane when the port rotor is feathered and the starboard rotor is
operating in active mode. The control surfaces are xed at the deection that would yield an equilibrium
condition at a height of 4 m if both rotors were operating in active mode. The water speed is 0.3 m/s.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1519

15

10
[]
5
0
-5
0 50 100 150 200
4.5
H []

4 Port wingtip
Strb wingtip
Canard
3.5
0 50 100 150 200
5.5
5
H [m]

4.5
4
3.5
0 50 100 150 200
t [s]

Fig. 21. Open-loop performance of the C-Plane when the port rotor is feathered and the starboard rotor is
operating in active mode. The control surfaces are xed at the deection that would yield an equilibrium
condition at a height of 4 m if both rotors were operating in active mode. The water speed is 0.15 m/s.

5. Conclusions

1
A six-degree-of-freedom mathematical model of the 30 th scale C-Plane prototype
system is created with the C-Plane represented as a rigid body and the cable
approximated with three linear elastic elements. The gravitational, buoyancy,
hydrodynamic, control, propulsive, cable, and gyroscopic forces are calculated as a
function of the states of the system, the water velocity, and the control surface
deections.
A dynamics simulation is created that uses the mathematical model of the
C-Plane. This simulation shows that the response of the vehicle is relatively slow with
maximum ascending and descending velocities of 0.013 (0.071) and 0.015 (0.082) m/s,
respectively, when the C-Plane is ying level. The maximum roll and yaw velocities
that are achieved by deecting the wingtips to create the maximum moment about
the z-axis are 2 (0.37) and 0.12 (0.022)1/s, respectively. The pitch is the only
orientation state that can be changed rapidly and has a maximum pitch velocity of

10 (
1.8)1/s when the canard is deected to produce maximum negative lift. This is
because the moment of inertia about the y-axis is small when compared to the other
moments of inertia and because deecting the canard creates a signicant moment
about the y-axis.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1520 J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521

The C-Plane is stable when operating in active mode and is able to reach heights
throughout the desired operating range with zero pitch, roll, and yaw. When
operating in null mode, the C-Plane stability is reduced but the C-Plane can still
reach the desired depths and can surface for maintenance. The design of the C-Plane
allows these heights to be reached in both active and null mode for all expected water
velocities. The control surfaces allow for the pitch, roll, and depth to be directly
controlled so that the C-Plane can be orientated and positioned to produce
maximum electricity from the Gulf Stream.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully thank Mr. James Dehlsen and the staff of Aqunatis LLC
for involving us and for their continual support and assistance in this project. This
work was partially supported by the US Department of Energy, Aquantis LLC, and
Florida Atlantic University.

References

Ablow, C.M., Schechter, S., 1983. Numerical simulation of undersea cable dynamics. Ocean Engineering
10 (6), 443457.
Banks, C., 1999. Helicopter Dynamic Stability [Online]. Available: http://www.aerojockey.com/papers/
helicopter/report.html
Bolton, W., 1998. Control Engineering, second ed. Addison-Wesley, Longman Publishing, New York.
Braginton-Smith, B., 2002. Offshore wind energy, frontier outposts for sustainable seas. MTS Journal 36
(4), 1115.
Buckham, B., Nohon, M., Seto, M., Zhao, X., Lambert, C., 2003. Dynamics and control of a towed
underwater vehicle system. Part I: Model development. Ocean Engineering 30, 453470.
Buckham, B., Driscoll, F.R., Nahon, M., 2004a. Development of a nite element cable model for use in
low-tension dynamics simulation. Journal of Applied Mechanics 71, 476485.
Buckham, B., Driscoll, F.R., Nahon, M., Radanovic, B., 2004b. Torsion mechanics in dynamics
simulation of low-tension marine teathers. International Journal of Offshore and Polar Engineering 14
(3), 218226 ISSN 1053-5381.
Cooke, J.M., Zyda, M.J., Pratt, D.R., Mcghee, R.B., 1994. NPSNET: Flight Simulation Dynamic
Modeling Using Quaternions, vol. 1, issue no. 4. Naval Postgraduate School Department of Computer
Science, January 25, 1(4), pp. 404420.
Czitrom, S., Nunez, I., Ramirez, I., 2002. Innovative uses of wave power: environmental management of
the Port of Ensenada, Mexico. MTS Journal 36 (4), 7484.
Driscoll, F.R., Lueck, R.G., Nahon, M., 2000. Development and validation of a lumped-mass dynamics
model of a deep sea ROV system. Applied Ocean Research, in press.
Etkin, B., 1972. Dynamics of Atmospheric Flight. Wiley, New York.
Evans, J., Nahon, M., 2004. Dynamics modeling and performance evaluation of an autonomous
underwater vehicle. Ocean Engineering 31, 18351858.
Fossen, T.I., 1994. Guidance and Control of Ocean Vehicles. Wiley, England.
Garza, F.R., Morelli, E.A., 2003. A Collection of Nonlinear Aircraft Simulations in MATLAB. National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA/TM-2003-212145.
Hay, E., Tweddle, G.A., Hay, N., 1992. Design for modest cost small OTEC plant using fully welded
aluminum heat exchangers. In: Proceedings of Oceans92, vol. 2, pp. 860865.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. VanZwieten et al. / Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 14851521 1521

Heydt, G.T., 1993. An assessment of ocean thermal energy conversion as an advanced electric generating
methodology. Proceedings of the IEEE 81 (3), 409418.
Kamman, J.W., Nguyen, T.C., Crane, J.W., 1989. Modeling towed cable system dynamics. Oceans89
Naval Costal Systems Center Research and Technology Department.
Kundu, P.K., Cohen, I.M., 2002. Fluid Mechanics, second ed. Academic Press, New York.
Kuo, B.C., 1995. Automatic Control Systems, seventh ed. Wiley, New York.
Lambert, C., Nahon, M., Buckhan, B., Seto, M., 2003. Dynamics and control of towed underwater vehicle
system. Part II: Model validation and turn maneuvering optimization. Ocean Engineering 30, 471485.
Lindeld, G., Penny, J., 1999. Numerical Methods using Matlab, second ed. Prentice-Hall Inc.,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
McCormick, B.W., 1979. Aerodynamics, Aeronautics, and Flight Mechanics. Wiley, New York.
McCormick, R.B., Kraemer, D.R.B., 2002. Ocean wave energy utilization. MTS Journal 36 (4), 5258.
Neelamani, S., 2002. A decade of wave power development in Indiathe challenges. MTS Journal 36 (4),
5973.
Palm III, W.J., 2000. Modeling, Analysis and Control of Dynamic Systems, second ed. Wiley, New York.
Pontes, M.T., Cavaleri, L., Mollison, D., 2002. Ocean waves: energy resource assessment. MTS Journal 36
(4), 4251.
Press, W.H., Teukolsky, S.A., Vetterling, W.T., Flannery, B.P., 1992. Numerical Recipes in C, second ed.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Radanovic, B., 2002. Development of an efcient general purpose cable model and simulation for marine
applications. Masters Thesis, Florida Atlantic University.
Rao, S.S., 1995. Mechanical Vibrations, third ed. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Inc., Reading,
MA.
Ravindran, M., Abraham, R., 2002. The Indian 1 MW demonstration OTEC plant and the pre-
commissioning tests. MTS Journal 36 (4), 3641.
Raye, R.E., 2001. Characterization study of the Florida Current at 26.11 north latitude, 79.50 west
longitude, for ocean current power generation. Masters Thesis, Florida Atlantic University.
Schjolberg, I., Fossen, T.I., 1994. Modeling and control of underwater vehicle-manipulator systems. In:
Proceedings of the Third Conference on Marine Craft Maneuvering and Control (MCMC94).
Southampton, UK, pp. 4557.
Tanner, D., 1995. Ocean thermal energy conversion: current overview and future outlook. Renewable
Energy 6 (3), 367373.
Ullman, A., 2002. Offshore tidal power generationa new approach to power conversion of the oceans
tides. MTS Journal 36 (4), 1624.
VanZwieten, J., Driscoll, F.R., Leonessa, A., Deane, G., 2005. Design of an ocean current turbine. Part II:
Flight control system. Ocean Engineering, in press, doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2005.10.006.
Vega, L.A., 2002. Ocean thermal energy conversion primer. MTS Journal 36 (4), 2535.
Venezia, W.A., Holt, J., 1995. Turbine under the gulf stream: potential energy source. Sea Technology
1014.
Von Arx, W.S., Stewart, H.B., Apel, J.R., 1974. The Florida current as a potential source of useable
energy. In: Proceedings of the McArthur Workshop on the Feasibility of Extracting Useable Energy
from the Florida Current.
Wu, J., Chwang, A.T., 2000. A hydrodynamic model of a two-part underwater towed system. Ocean
Engineering 27, 455472.