## 3 Results and Discussion
A detailed analysis of the plot reveals that for carriage speeds up to 1.2 m/s, the generated power from the BEM simulations is slightly higher than the experimental results. The experimental data show a mean power output of 5.8 W at 1.2 m/s. In contrast, the BEM simulations show a mean power output of 7.9 W for the same speed, indicating systematic overestimation by the simulations. Figure 8: Comparison of average generated power values with increasing carriage speed from 0 to 2 m/s from experimental and BEM simulation results. Figure 7: Generated power across different carriage speeds during experimental testing of scaled hydrokinetic turbine. However, as the carriage speed approaches 2 m/s, the generated power estimated by the BEM calculations and the experimental results become closer. Specifically, at 2 m/s, the BEM simulations indicate a peak power output of 18.1 W, while the experimental results show a peak power output of 16.3 W. The discrepancy between the experimental data and the BEM simulations at lower speeds suggests that the performance of the scaled OCT model might have been somewhat overestimated by the simulations for lower speeds. These differences between the experimental data and the BEM simulations could be attributed to several factors. One possibility is measurement error due to the experimental setup or the equipment used to measure the generated power, which might not have been accurate enough. Additionally, some of the intricate hydrodynamic effects that manifest in an actual OCT, particularly at various water speeds, may not have been fully captured or accurately represented by the BEM simulations. This includes complex turbulence effects and three-dimensional flow phenomena that are challenging to model accurately with the BEM method. Figure 9 illustrates a graph depicting the measured generated torque as a function of carriage speed during the experimental testing. The graph demonstrates direct proportionality between the generated torque and the output power of the turbine. This means that as the power output of the turbine increases, the torque produced by the turbine also increases. A detailed analysis of the data reveals that the generated torque increases from 0 to 0.29 N\(\cdot\)m as the carriage speed increases from 0 to 2 m/s. This trend underscores the direct relationship between the kinetic energy of the fluid flow and the mechanical output of the turbine. The statistical analysis shows a strong correlation between carriage speed and generated torque. Moreover, the analysis indicates that the turbine operates within safe torque limits across the tested speed range, mitigating the risk of mechanical damage. However, it is crucial to ensure that the torque remains within optimal levels to avoid inefficiencies and potential damage to the generator. Figure 10 illustrates the relationship between carriage speed and generated torque for both the experimental and BEM simulation results. The twisting force exerted by the underwater current turbine blades, referred to as generated torque, facilitates the rotation of the turbine's rotor to generate electricity. The upward sloping trend in the graph indicates  
Figure 9: Generated torque across different carriage speeds during experimental testing of scaled hydrokinetic turbine. that as the carriage speed is increased from 0 to 2 m/s, the generated torque also increases, ranging from 0 to 0.3 N\(\cdot\)m in the BEM simulation and from 0 to 0.28 N\(\cdot\)m in the experiment. This trend aligns with our theoretical expectations, as the quantity of energy available in the moving fluid, which rises with current speed, is directly proportional to the created torque. The experimental data show that the torque was slightly less than what the BEM calculations had projected.