See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/308141648

Resistance and Seakeeping Characteristics of a Systematic Series in the Pre-

planing Condition (Part I)

Article · September 2002

CITATIONS READS

21 1,777

2 authors, including:

Gregory Grigoropoulos
National Technical University of Athens
94 PUBLICATIONS   321 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Added resistance in waves via potential and viscous flow methods View project

Resistance of High-Speed Craft View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Gregory Grigoropoulos on 15 September 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Resistance and Seakeeping Characteristics of a
Systematic Series in the Pre-planing Condition
(Part I)

G.J. Grigoropoulos* and T. A. Loukakis**

ABSTRACT

A systematic Series of double – chine, wide transom hull form with warped planing surface has
been developed at the Laboratory for Ship & Marine Hydrodynamics of the National Technical
University of Athens. The Series are appropriate for the preliminary design of large monohull
ships and pleasure craft, which operate at high but preplaning speeds. The Series consists of five
models with L/B = 4.00, 4.75, 5.50, 6.25 & 7.00, each tested at six displacements, including very
light ones. The resistance characteristics, which are shown to be very good, are presented in this
paper. In addition, existing full scale data and Laboratory seakeeping experiments indicate
excellent rough water performance characteristics for the Series.

1. INTRODUCTION acceleration data could be compared favorably with

Many years ago a “High Speed Planing Hull for Rough
Water” was invented in the U.S.A. (Savitsky, Roper,
and Benen, 1972). The novel hull form had a wide
transom, warped planing surface, double chine and very
fine bow lines. Some years later two high-speed craft
were tested in rough seas, one with the novel hull form
and the other with a traditional hard chine. The results
of the full-scale trials were published in the 1976
SNAME Transactions (Blount and Hankley) and their
findings were very favorable for the novel hull form,
although this was not stated explicitly! Thus, Mr.
Richard Hopkins was forced to ask, in the discussion of
the paper, for an explanation “why Craft I CG
Craft II at twice the sea intensity” to get only a limited
answer from the authors about the virtues of the double
chine “in providing a smooth vertical entry in the waves
due to high beam loading”.
In the 25 years since this discussion, the authors are not
aware of such planing craft been constructed in the
U.S.A. However, it seems that the aforementioned hull
form concept has been used extensively elsewhere (in
Europe at least) but not in the planing condition and at
lighter (non-dimensional) displacements than those of
the rather small craft tested in the U.S.A. Actually, the
craft proposed by Savitsky et al, 1972 had the following
characteristics LWL = 92 ft, B = 15.6 ft and Δ = 150,000
lbs, corresponding to L/B = 5.86 and CDL = 3.14. The

* Associate Professor NTUA 1

** Professor NTUA
cruising speed of the craft was to be 12 knots (Fn =
0.37), the planing speed 45 knots (Fn = 1.4) and the
craft was designed to have good resistance and
manoeuvrability characteristics.
The lower speeds and lower values of the volume of
displacement coefficient CDL =  / (0.1LWL)3 associated
with present day designs, refer (rather obviously) to
“ships” instead of “craft” and in particular to passenger
ships and to car – passenger ferries operating in the
“pre-planing” region. This means that they are not
50
Fast Cat
Fn=1.00
40
Speed [knots]
30
20
10
0
0 50
Fig. 1: Speed is relative. Fast designs of the 90s.
From this Figure and other pertinent information one
can define (today!) a “fast monohull” ship in the pre-
planing regime as one with LWL between 40m and
150m, running at speeds between 25 and 45 knots. The
“novel” double chine hull form of the 70’s has found
new meaning and usefulness when used for this type of
ships. And, since a good picture can say a lot, the
following Fig.2 shows the hull form of “Corsaire
Fig. 2: Model of the Corsaire 11000
planing in the sense that the “flow has separated from
the chine(s) and transom and the wetted keel length is
shorter than the calm water waterline”. There is no
commonly accepted definition of what a “pre-planing”
vessel is, other than she does not possess a
displacement type hull form and that she operates at
speeds corresponding to Fn greater than 0.4 and mostly
in the region of 0.6. This vague statement can become
clearer if one plots the LWL vs characteristics of many
passenger ships and ferries built in the last decade, Fig.
1 from Levander, 2001, enriched by the authors:
Fn=0.60
Fast Mono
Fn=0.35
Displacement Fn=0.25
Type Ferries
100 150 200 250 300
Length WL [m]
11000” as tested in 1994 at the Basin d’ Essais de
Carenes in Paris, (Galtier, 1995). This car-passenger
ferry has a LOA of 102m, a LWL of 87.5m, a
displacement of 1200mt (CDL=1.79), a speed of 40
knots (Fn=0.7) and was advertised to provide “speed
and comfort”, claims that hold true in real life since
three such ships operate already in Greece!
2
The authors were aware of the virtues of the double Finally, living in the age of the…. “numerical towing
chine hull form since the 80’s and had discussed the tank”, it would be an omission not to try to predict the
possibility of creating a systematic series with Daniel model results with modern analytical numerical tools.
Savitsky. However, this endeavor was going to be
basically a not externally funded University project and NOMENCLATURE
hence its progress was bound to be slow. Actually, a
first model with a double chine hull form was designed, B maximum breadth at upper chine
built and tested in the late 80’s. The model was 2.29m
long and was tested at the maximum possible speed of 5
CDL,CDL=  0.1L WL 3 , the volume of displacement
m/s, i.e. at a Fn of about 1.0. This speed limitation, coefficient
coupled with the knowledge of new designs in Europe C.G.rise the dynamic vertical displacement of the
of large fast passenger vessels, led to the creation of a centre of gravity from the static equilibrium
systematic series for such ships, designed to operate in position, positive upwards
= RF ( 12  WS  V
2
the region Fn 0.55 to 0.85-0.90. These limits CF ) , residuary resistance
correspond to a 40 m passenger vessel running at 33 coefficient
knots and to a 140 m passenger ferry running at 40
CR,CR = RR ( 12  WS  V
2
knots. Even, a 20 m private yacht does 25 knots when ) , residuary resistance
running at Fn. = 0.90. Thus, the usefulness of the series coefficient
for vessels of any substantial size is obvious. To Cw = RW ( 12  WS  V 2 ) , wave resistance
enhance the usefulness of the project, it was decided to
coefficient
slowly construct an extensive series both for resistance
and seakeeping, having in mind that no other  Volume of displacement
experimental resistance series contains systematic tests Δ displacement
in waves and no other systematic resistance series for EHP Effective Horsepower
fast ships contains information about operation at very Fn =V gL WL , Froude number
light displacements.
The NTUA double chine Series ended up consisting of Fnh =V gh , Froude Number based on depth
five (small) models with L/B values, 4.00, 4.75, 5.50, L, LOA overall length
6.25 and 7.00 and five larger versions of the previous L/B the ratio of the overall length and the
models to accommodate the very light displacements. maximum breadth
Each combination was tested at six displacements, to LCG long. position of Centre of Gravity measured
cover the needs of both large fast ships and smaller from amidships (positive forward)
passenger ships or private yachts, Table 1. LWL waterline length at rest
This paper contains the results of the resistance tests M = L/1/3,
only which have been completed very recently. RF frictional resistance
However, some publications on additional special RR residuary resistance
investigations performed and two presentations of RT total resistance
partial results of the Series in the period 1995 to 2001 RW wave resistance
exist and they will be mentioned in the sequel. ρ water density
Unfortunately, the extensive testing in waves, both T mean draught
regular and random, is not yet completed, to further t dynamic trim, (positive by stern)
demonstrate the virtues of the double chine hull form. V speed
It should be mentioned here that the ships this Series WS wetted surface at rest
refers to, exist gratis to recent advances in Marine
Engines (Diesels with very high power density and
Marine Gas Turbines) and Propulsion Devices 2. VALIDATION OF THE PARENT FORM
(extensive use of water jets).
For the sake of completeness, the nice work of Savitsky The parent form of the Series has an L/B = 5.50 and its
& Brown, 1976 for the prediction of resistance in the lines plan are shown in Fig. 3. The change of deadrise
preplaning range, in the form of a regression analysis of angle vs keel length is shown in Fig. 4
the corresponding results of seven resistance Series,
should be mentioned. However, the range of application
of this analysis covers partially only the contents of the
present Series.

3
 Fig 3: Lines plan of the parent hull form of the NTUA systematic series
(the body plan has been scaled up by a factor of three).

60

50
DEADRISE ANGLE (DEG.)

40

30

20

10

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

STERN X/L OA

Fig. 4: Deadrise angle vs x/LOA

4
To validate the resistance characteristics of the parent,
it was decided (see Grigoropoulos and Loukakis, 1995)
to test it against four other “equivalent” hull forms,
having the same length and beam. The resulting sample
of five hull forms is described as follows:
 Series 62, single chine, Clement & Blount
(1963)
 Deep V, single chine, Keuning & Gerritsma
(1982)
a. Series 62
c. Double chine with wide transom
d. Doudle chine based on Series 62
Fig. 5: Body plans of five “equivalent” hull forms
The five models were tested extensively, without and
with spray rails and it was concluded that:
 The double chine, wide transom hull form
possessed better resistance characteristics in
the pre-planing region.
 No spray rails were necessary for this hull
form. In fact they increased the resistance,
5
 Double chine, based on Series 62,
Grigoropoulos & Loukakis (1995)
 Double chine with wide transom, Savitsky et
al (1972)
 Rounded bilge variant of double chine with
wide transom, Grigoropoulos & Loukakis
(1995)
The body plan of all five models is shown in Fig. 5.
b. Deep-V
e. Rounded bilge
although they improved the resistance
characteristics of the other hull forms.
In Fig. 6 the comparison of the resistance of the
five equivalent models is shown in the pre-planing
region.
 0.20
(R /Δ) curves for the five "equivalent" models
T
Double Chine W/O spray rails, NTUA Series (L/B=5.50)
Double Chine with spray rails, NTUA Series (L/B=5.50)
Rounded Bilge with spray rails, based on NTUA Series
Double Chine with spray rails, based on Series 62
0.15
Deep-V with spray rails, Keuning and Gerritsma (1982)
Series 62 with spray rails, Clement and Blount (1963)
The NPL high speed round bilge displacement hull series
RT /Δ

0.10

0.05

0.00

0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn
Fig. 6: Comparison of the resistance for the five “ equivalent ” models in the
pre-planing region.

The models had a length of 2.29 m and were tested at a
displacement of 29.7 kg. The corresponding volume of
displacement coefficient is CDL = 3.00 and refers to a
loading condition heavier than those used for modern
large and fast passenger ships and ferries.
When looking at Fig. 6, one should keep in mind that
only the double chine hull form and its rounded bilge
variant have a wide transom. This fact might explain
their slightly better resistance characteristics in the pre-
planing region.
To further investigate the resistance characteristics of
the parent hull form, a comparison was made with an
“equivalent” model of the NPL Series, Bailey, 1976.
i.e. with L/B =5.50 and M = 6.936. The results are
superimposed in Fig. 6 and show that, for the pre-
planing region, although the parent hull form is not a
resistance champion, is a very good performer indeed.
The combined experimental results, of resistance,
dynamic trim and C.G. rise are shown in Fig. 7 for a
volume of displacement coefficient equal to CDL=1.00.

6
 0.20 0.80
L/B = 5.5, C DL= 1.0

RT/(Δ*Fn2 ), DYNAMIC TRIM [deg], C.G.-RISE/Lwl [%]

RT /Δ
DYNAMIC TRIM

0.16 C.G.-RISE/Lwl 0.60

2
R /(Δ*Fn )

0.12 0.40
RT/ Δ

0.08 0.20

0.04 0.00

0.00 -0.20

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00

Fn

Fig. 7: Resistance, C.G. rise and dynamic trim of the parent hull form in the pre-planing region.

It is interesting to observe in Fig. 7, the very good
resistance trend as speed increases, together with the
negligible squat and very small dynamic trim angle in
the region of Fn =0.60-0.90.
Having thus a parent hull form with a wide transom,
which is a normal feature for large fast passenger ships,
very good reputation for performance in rough water
(verified by seakeeping tests in the Towing Tank) and
superior resistance characteristics; it was decided to use
this parent to form a systematic Series. In Fig. 8 the
first real life member of the Series is shown under
construction is Sicily in 2000. The hull is intended for a
30 knot, 38 m long, 300 passenger vessel to operate in
the Gulf of Naples.

Fig. 8 All Aluminium, double chine passenger vessel

7
3. THE SYSTEMATIC SERIES
The length-beam ratio (L/B) is, as usual, the dominant
parameter in the generation of a systematic series of
“fast” hull forms, when both their resistance and
seakeeping characteristics are to be examined. The
lower value of this parameter was taken as 4.00,
because the Series do not pertain to small pleasure craft
and the higher value as 7.00 in conformity with normal
practice. The value of L/B = 5.50 was used for the
parent hull form of the series and five members of the
Series were designed, constructed and tested with L/B
values of 4.00, 4.75, 5.50, 6.25 and 7.00.
The parent hull, Fig. 3, has two successive chines
running forward of the transom up to 70% of the hull
length. Fine highly flared lines form the bow region.
The hull form has a wide transom and a varying
deadrise angle distribution, from 10o at the stern to
about 70o at the bow, Fig. 4, as suggested by Savitsky et
al (1972). The Series members with different values of
L/B were derived from the parent by keeping the same
midship section and altering appropriately the station
spacing.
The other parameter of the Series is the non-
dimensional volume of displacement coefficient
CDL   0.1LWL  , where  is the displaced
3
8
volume and LWL the waterline length, both at rest. CDL
is another form of the traditional parameter M= L/1/3
used in other high speed Series. The angle of entrance
is very small for all waterlines tested. Six values of C DL
= 1.00, 1.61, 2.23, 3.00, 3.62 and 4.23 were used as
shown in Table 1. The lower values of CDL correspond
to the operating conditions of large ships, whereas the
higher values to smaller passenger ships and pleasure
craft. This fact, coupled with higher values of L/B for
larger ships and lower values for smaller vessels,
defines grosso-modo the more valuable portion at the
grid of the experimental results. The model lengths
were determined using the 21st I.T.T.C. High Speed
Marine Vehicles Committee suggestion (Trondheim,
1996), that at least two-meter models should be used for
such craft. However, the smaller values of CDL could
not be achieved with these model lengths. Thus, for
each member of Series a larger model was also build
and tested, as shown in Table 1.
The relative position of the waterlines corresponding to
the six loading conditions of the Series is shown in Fig.
9 for all models. It should be noted that the immersion
of the chine(s) is not the same for different values of
L/B and that for L/B=4.00 and 4.75 and CDL= 1.00,
even the lower chine is above the static waterline!
 2 4 6
1 3 5

2 4 6
1 3 5

2 4 6
1 3 5

2 4 6
1 3 5

2 4 6

1 3 5

Fig. 9 : CDL’s of the experiments at corresponding waterlines

9
Table 1: The characteristics of the tested models of the NTUA Series

L/B 4.00-big 4.00-small 4.75-big 4.75-small 5.50-big 5.50-small 6.25-big 6.25-small 7.00-big 7.00-small
(163/01) (113/95) (150/99A) (154/99) (118/96) (097/94) (164/01) (146/98) (166/01) (116/96)
LOA 3.820 m 2.292 m 3.820 m 2.292 m 3.820 m 2.292 m 4.3417 2.605 m 4.8617 2.917 m

CDL

3.392 1.323 3.415 1.348 3.430 1.365 3.968 1.718 4.457 2.083
1.00 39.057 39.781 41.443 63.100 88.140
-0.389 0.080 -0.436 0.077 -0.480 0.077 -0.515 0.088 -0.651 0.097
3.445 1.738 3.468 1.696 3.497 1.635 4.029 2.022 2.418 0.728 4.530 2.453 2.718 0.883
1.61 66.097 67.118 69.103 105.405 22.767 150.095 32.421
-0.461 0.099 -0.495 0.096 -0.511 0.097 -0.519 0.113 -0.311 0.068 -0.640 0.128 -0.384 0.077
3.480 2.004 3.505 1.915 2.103 0.689 3.539 1.832 2.123 0.660 4.070 2.265 2.442 0.815 2.731 0.988
2.23 93.890 96.021 20.741 99.564 21.506 150.151 32.433 45.436
-0.494 0.115 -0.511 0.114 -0.307 0.068 -0.490 0.117 -0.294 0.070 -0.500 0.137 -0.300 0.082 -0.369 0.093
3.514 2.244 2.109 0.808 3.539 2.117 2.124 0.763 2.145 0.728 4.113 2.547 2.468 0.917 2.7830 1.1304
3.00 130.436 28.174 133.078 28.745 29.615 208.642 45.067 64.618
-0.509 0.134 -0.305 0.080 -0.508 0.135 -0.301 0.081 -0.297 0.083 -0.472 0.165 -0.283 0.099 -0.345 0.116
2.110 0.857 2.137 0.812 2.160 0.782 2.482 0.996 2.809 1.245
3.62 33.993 35.357 36.513 55.489 80.344
-0.307 0.087 -0.300 0.086 -0.288 0.095 -0.311 0.114 -0.327 0.135
2.123 0.903 2.150 0.859 2.175 0.834 2.509 1.074 2.834 1.355
4.23 40.462 42.039 43.530 66.752 96.134
-0.305 0.096 -0.294 0.100 -0.280 0.106 -0.297 0.129 -0.309 0.152

Notes:
1. Each cell of the table contains the following characteristics of the model:
LWL [m] WS
[m2]
Δ [Kgr]
LCG [m] T [m]
2. LCG from amidships, positive forwards.

10
4. RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS OF
THE SERIES
The experimental results were obtained in the Towing
Tank of the Laboratory for Ship & Marine
Hydrodynamics of the National Technical University of
Athens. The facility has dimensions of 91m x 4.6 m x
3.0 m and the highest speed of the towing carriage is
5.3m/s. The wooden models were attached to the
carriage via a heave – rod, pitch – bearing, resistance
measuring assembly. They were thus free to vertical
motion and trim. No turbulence stimulators were used.
Blockage effect calculations showed that no correction
was necessary and subsequent tests in a larger facility
verified this claim. As it can be seen from the C.G. rise
0.16
L/B=5.50
CDL=3.00
Static waterline
0.12 Running waterline
R /Δ
0.08
0.04
0.00
0.20 0.40
Fig. 10 : Total Resistance using static and dynamic values of LWL and WS
In addition, as the Series pertain to relatively large
vessels, it is expected that they float at even keel in
calm water and therefore the additional complication,
normal for planing craft, of examining the effect of the
L.C.G. location to resistance was deemed unnecessary.
and dynamic trim diagrams of the next paragraph, there
is relatively small C.G. departure from the calm water
level as well as a relatively small dynamic trim angle in
the Fn region of operation. Therefore it did not seem
necessary to follow the usual towing tank practice for
predicting planing craft resistance, which uses speed
dependent values of the wetted surface to apply
Froude’s method for full - scale predictions. Using the
static values for LWL and WS and the corresponding
values measured under way and comparing the results,
Fig. 10, verified this fact. The small differences can be
neglected in view of the much greater simplicity of the
Series tables, when the usual for displacement ships
values for CR based on the static values for LWL & WS
can be used.
0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20
Fn
Thus, the contents of Table 1, where for each pair (L/B-
CDL) the corresponding values for: LWL, WS, Δ, LCG
and T are given, together with the CR values presented
in the next paragraph, are adequate for the application
of Froude’s method for resistance prediction, using the
I.T.T.C. 1957 skin friction line formulation. That is, the
11
as above calculated frictional resistance coefficient CF,
is subtracted from the experimentally determined CT to
yield CR, shown in all Figs as well as in the Appendix I.
4.1 The Residuary Resistance Diagrams
For all models tested, small and large, the values of C R,
together with those for C.G. rise and dynamic trim are
plotted vs. Fn in Figs. 11 to 15 (a: CR, b: Dynamic trim,
c: C.G.). For each case, the results for all CDL values are
shown. The results as presented refer to raw
experimental data and one can see good agreement
between small and large model results. Also, the results
of the additional tests performed with the large, L/B =
5.50 model at the experimental facility of DERA at
Haslar (see paragraph 4.3) are in very good agreement
12
with the Athens Tank results and are also plotted in Fig
13.
During the tests, an appropriate unloading force was
applied to the model to account for the vertical
component of the “thrust” force of a propeller axis,
assumed inclined longitudinally by 6.5o. However, this
is an overall minor correction.
Finally, with respect to the possible effect of the
Towing Tank depth (3 m) to the wave resistance, a
recent paper by Brizzolara et Bruzzone (2002) shows,
numerically and for similar hullforms, that the limited
depth effect is negligible e.g. for Fnh=0.7 and Fn=0.8
(small model case). The same conclusion is reached by
comparing the large model results from Athens Towing
Tank (3m depth) and DERA Towing Tank at Haslar
(5.5 m depth), Fig. 20.
 12.00

L/B=4.00

CDL=1.00
10.00
CDL=1.00
CDL=1.61
CDL=2.23

8.00 CDL=3.00
CDL=3.00
CDL=3.62
3
CR*10

CDL=4.23
6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn

Fig. 11a: Residuary Resistance for L/B=4.00

3.00

L/B=4.00

CDL=1.00
CDL=1.61
CDL=2.23
2.00
CDL=3.00
CDL=3.62
Dynamic trim [deg]

CDL=4.23

1.00

0.00

-1.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn
Fig. 11b: Dynamic trim for L/B=4.00

13
 1.00

L/B=4.00

CDL=1.00
CDL=1.61
CDL=2.23
0.50
CDL=3.00
CDL=3.62
CG Rise/LWL[%]

CDL=4.23

0.00

-0.50

-1.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn
Fig. 11c: C.G Rise for L/B=4.00

12.00

L/B=4.75

CDL=1.00

10.00 CDL=1.00
CDL=1.61
CDL=1.61
CDL=2.23
8.00
CDL=2.23
CDL=3.00
3

CDL=3.00
CR*10

6.00 CDL=3.62
CDL=4.23

4.00

2.00

0.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn

Fig. 12a: Residuary Resistance for L/B=4.75

14
 3.00

L/B=4.75

CDL=1.00
CDL=1.61
CDL=2.23
2.00 CDL=3.00

Dynamic trim [deg] CDL=3.62

CDL=4.23

1.00

0.00

-1.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn
Fig. 12 b: Dynamic trim for L/B=4.75

1.00
L/B=4.75

CDL=1.00
CDL=1.61
CDL=2.23

0.50 CDL=3.00
CDL=3.62
CDL=4.23
CG Rise/LWL[%]

0.00

-0.50

-1.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn

Fig 12c: C.G Rise for L/B=4.75

15
 12.00
L/B=5.50

CDL=1.00
CDL=1.00-Dera
10.00
CDL=1.61
CDL=1.61-Dera
CDL=2.23
CDL=2.23
8.00
CDL=2.23-Dera
CDL=3.00
3

CDL=3.62
CR*10

CDL=4.23
6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn

Fig. 13a: Residuary Resistance for L/B=5.50

3.00
L/B=5.50

CDL=1.00
CDL=1.00-Dera
CDL=1.61
CDL=1.61-Dera
2.00 CDL=2.23
CDL=2.23-Dera
CDL=3.00
Dynamic trim [deg]

CDL=3.62
CDL=4.23

1.00

0.00

-1.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn

Fig 13b: Dynamic trim for L/B=5.50

16
 1.00
L/B=5.50

CDL=1.00
CDL=1.00-Dera
CDL=1.61
CDL=1.61-Dera
0.50
CDL=2.23
CDL=2.23-Dera
CDL=3.00
CG Rise/LWL [%]

CDL=3.62
CDL=4.23

0.00

-0.50

-1.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn
Fig. 13c: C.G Rise for L/B=5.50

14.00

L/B=6.25
12.00 CDL=1.00
CDL=1.61
CDL=1.61
10.00 CDL=2.23
CDL=2.23
CDL=3.00
8.00
3

CDL=3.00
CR*10

CDL=3.62
CDL=4.23
6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn
Fig. 14a: Residuary Resistance for L/B=6.25

17
 3.00

L/B=6.25

CDL=1.00
CDL=1.61
CDL=2.23
2.00
CDL=3.00

Dynamic trim [deg] CDL=3.62

CDL=4.23

1.00

0.00

-1.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn
Fig. 14b: Dynamic trim for L/B=6.25

1.00

L/B=6.25

CDL=1.00
CDL=1.61
CDL=2.23
0.50 CDL=3.00
CDL=3.62
CDL=4.23
CG Rise/LWL [%]

0.00

-0.50

-1.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn

Fig. 14c: C.G Rise for L/B=6.25

18
 14.00

L/B=7.00

12.00 CDL=1.00
CDL=1.61
CDL=1.61

10.00 CDL=2.23
CDL=3.00
CDL=3.62

8.00
3

CDL=4.23
CR*10

6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn

Fig. 15a: Residuary Resistance for L/B=7.00

3.00

2.00
Dynamic trim [deg]

1.00

L/B=7.00

CDL=1.00
CDL=1.61
CDL=2.23
0.00
CDL=3.00
CDL=3.62
CDL=4.23

-1.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn

Fig. 15b: Dynamic trim for L/B=7.00

19
 1.00

L/B=7.00

CDL=1.00
CDL=1.61
CDL=2.23
0.50
CDL=3.00
CDL=3.62
CG Rise/LWL [%]
CDL=4.23

0.00

-0.50

-1.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn

Fig. 15c: C.G Rise for L/B=7.00

4.2 The special case of low L/B ratios
When cross-checking the experimental results, one
useful check was to plot the values of CR vs Fn. for
each value of the volume of displacement coefficient
CDL. These plots, Fig.16 to 19, for CDL values of 3.00,
2.23, 1.61 and 1.00 reveal an interesting phenomenon
associated with the nature of flow about the hull forms.
That is, whereas for the higher values 3.00 and 2.23 of
CDL the CR values are nested, Figs. 16 and 17, with the
longer ships having higher CR values, this is not the
case for CDL = 1.00 and the lower L/B ratios of 4.75 and
4.00, Figs. 18 and 19. The different trend is becoming
apparent from the CDL = 1.61 and L/B = 4.0 case, Fig.
18 and is fully developed for the CDL = 1.00 light
loading, Fig. 19. In the later case the “broader” L/B=4.0
and 4.75, hull forms behave differently and they tend to
have higher CR values than the “narrower”, L/B = 5.5,
6.25 and 7.0, hull forms for Fns between 0.5 and 0.9.
Possibly, the fact that even the lower chine is above the
waterline, Fig. 9, for the lower values of both L/B and
CDL is responsible for the different resistance
characteristics. However, this trend is in agreement
with the experimental results at Haslar for higher values
of Fn, Fig. 19. Obviously, the extreme case of CDL=1.00
needs further experimental investigation.

20
 10.00

CDL=3.00
9.00
L/B=4.00
L/B=4.75
8.00 L/B=5.50
L/B=6.25
L/B=7.00
7.00
3
CR*10

6.00

5.00

4.00

3.00

2.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn

Fig. 16: CR for CDL=3.00

7.00

CDL=2.23

L/B=4.00
6.00
L/B=4.75
L/B=5.50
L/B=6.25
5.00 L/B=7.00
3
CR*10

4.00

3.00

2.00

1.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn

Fig. 17: CR for CDL=2.23

21
 5.00

CDL=1.61

L/B=4.00
L/B=4.75
4.00 L/B=5.50
L/B=6.25
L/B=7.00
3
CR*10

3.00

2.00

1.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn
Fig. 18: CR for CDL=1.61

4.00

CDL=1.00

L/B=4.00
L/B=4.75
L/B=5.50
L/B=5.50-Dera

3.00 L/B=6.25
Curve 5
3
CR*10

2.00

1.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Fn

Fig. 19: CR for CDL=1.00

22
4.3 The High Speed Experiments at the experimental facility of DERA at Haslar, U.K.
These experiments were made possible in the
The large 3.82 m model of the parent hull form with framework of the Access to Large Facilities Program of
L/B = 5.5 was tested for resistance and seakeeping also the 4th Framework Research Program of the E.U.

7.0
L/B=5.50 (Large model)
Experiments at DERA
6.0
CDL=1.00, Even keel

5.0 CDL=1.00, Trim by stern

CDL=1.00, Trim by bow
3

4.0 CDL=1.61, Even keel

CR *10

CDL=2.23, Even Keel

3.0 CDL=1.00, Even keel, NTUA

CDL=1.61, Even keel, NTUA

2.0 CDL=2.23, Even keel, NTUA

1.0

0.0
1.0
C.G. Rise/Lwl [%]

0.5

0.0

-0.5

2.0
Dyn. Trim [deg]

1.0

0.0

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

Fn
Fig. 20: L/B=5.50, CDL=1.00,1.61 and 2.23. High-speed experiments at Haslar

The top carriage speed at Haslar is 12 m/s and a Fn of
about 1.8 could be reached. The results of the
experiments at CDL = 1.00, 1.61 & 2.23 are shown in
Fig. 20 with the model at even keel and with a trim by
stern and trim by bow. The corresponding CR results
from the Athens Tank are superimposed, showing very
good agreement.
The behavior of the double chine hull form in the
planing region continues to be excellent. The hull form
running with the C.G. at almost the calm water level
and with very low running trim. Figs. 21, 22 & 23 show
the running behavior of the hull form at Fn=0.55, 0.85
and 1.8 respectively. The last Fn = 1.8 corresponds to a
speed of 110 knots for a 100 m long ship!

23
Fig 21: L/B=5.50, CDL=1.00, Fn=0.55

Fig 22: L/B=5.50, CDL=1.00, Fn=0.85

Fig 23: L/B=5.50, CDL=1.00, Fn=1.80

24
4.4 Supplementary investigations
During the long time it took the resistance part of the
Series to be completed - the seakeeping part is still
evolving – some useful supplementary experimental
investigations were made concerning: the need to use
spray rails, the effectiveness of stern wedges and the
effect of the LCG location (initial trim). The results of
these investigations have already been reported and
only their useful conclusions will be presented here.
Spray rails: Before testing planing hull forms one has
obviously to examine the necessity of installing spray
rails, which might be needed even for the full-scale
vessel. This was done for the double chine model as
well as for all the other models tested for comparison,
as described in paragraph 2. It was very interesting to
discover that the use of spray rails improved the
resistance characteristics of all hull forms except the
double chine, where the “resistance” caused by the rails
increased the overall resistance of the model, Fig. 6.
The detailed investigation can be found in
Grigoropoulos and Loukakis, 1995 and Grigoropoulos,
1997.
Stern Wedges: Stern wedges are well known to
improve the resistance characteristics of fast vessels
and especially of older naval vessels whose increased
displacement and hull surface roughness have
diminished their maximum speed. Lately, “duck tails”
have found use in ultra modern hull forms used on
displacement type ferries, whose speed is pushing the
speed limit towards Fn = 0.40, Kanerva, 2001.
For the case of the parent hull form of the Series,
extensive experiments have been done at the volume of
displacement coefficient CDL=3.00. It has been found
that, since the hull form seems to be running at
optimum trim, the effect of different configurations of
stern wedges on the resistance is small and can be either
positive or negative. Grigoropoulos and Loukakis, 1996
have reported these results. Additional tests, including
25
the hull form with L/B=7.0 and with the same
conclusions, have been reported by Grigoropoulos,
1997.
Initial Trim: Systematic resistance series for planing
craft include always an extensive investigation of the
effect of the LCG position on resistance. This is so
because the LCG position of relatively small craft can
be readily shifted when some “weights” are moved
along the vessel, which can also be designed with an
initial (small) static trim.
This is not the case for the larger vessels addressed by
the present Series, which have to be designed at (static)
even keel. However, it might help the designer to know
the resistance characteristics of the double chine hull
form in the trimmed condition and such tests were
conducted both in the Athens Tank and at the Haslar
Tank, Fig. 20 and have been reported by Grigoropoulos
and Damala, 2001. All five models of the series were
tested for CDL = 3.00 and a LCG location corresponding
to even keel at rest. Then, the models wave tested at the
same displacement and LCG locations shifted fore by
30% and aft by 20% of their even keel values, Table 1.
The resulting trim angles were about 0.8o by bow and
0.5o by stern. In addition, the effect of trim on the
resistance of the parent hull form was investigated at
loading conditions corresponding to CDL=1.00, 1.61 and
2.23. Finally, the parent model of the Series was tested
for trim effects at the Haslar Tank at higher speeds up
to Fn =1.80.
The general comments from these additional test are
that, in the pre-planing region of Fn 0.50 to 0.85, trim
by bow is beneficial, decreasing resistance, G.G. rise
and dynamic trim angle. The effect is more pronounced
near the resistance hump. Conversely, the effect of trim
by stern is detrimental. The above are demonstrated in
Fig. 24, where the corresponding results for L/B= 5.50
and CDL = 1.00, 1.61, 2.23 and 3.00 are shown. The
high speed results for the parent hull form are shown in
Fig. 20.
 12.5

L/B=5.50
(Large model)
10.0
CDL=1.61 Even keel
CDL=1.61 Trim by stern
CDL=1.61 Trim by bow
CR * 103 7.5 CDL=2.23 Even keel
CDL=2.23 Trim by stern
CDL=2.23 Trim by bow

5.0

2.5

0.0

1.0
C.G. Rise/Lwl [%]

0.5

0.0

-0.5

3.0
Dynamic Trim [deg]

2.0

1.0

0.0

0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Fig. 24: Initial trim effect on resistance and running attitude

4. 5 Using the Series
To demonstrate the use of the Series, we assume the
case of a hypothetical car-ferry with the following
characteristics: LWL=115 m, D= 2520 mt, L/B=5.5,
WS=1768.1 m2, and we want to predict its resistance at
39.2 knots, i.e. at Fn=0.60. For this case CDL=1.61 and
from Fig. 6, we read CR=2.2 x 10-3. The corresponding
frictional resistance, using the ITTC 1958 friction line
for Rn= V · LWL/ν = 1.95 109, is CF=1.41 10-3. Hence,
R=RR + RF = ½ ρ WS V2 (CR + CF) = 135768 kp, where
ρ = 104.61kp sec2/m4 for salt water of 150 C and ν =
1.18831 10-6 m2/sec, the kinematic viscosity of salt
water at the same temperature. Thus, the Effective
Horsepower for the ship is EHP = R V /75 = 36505 HP.
5. ANALYTICAL PREDICTION OF THE
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Analytical – numerical predictions are cheaper and
much faster in the era of P.C. super computing and they
are slowly replacing experiments. This is true
nevertheless only when computations are fully
validated by long-term comparison to good
experimental results, as e.g. is the case for subcavitating

26
marine propellers. At present the main effort of the
many CFD research teams, and NTUA has a very good
one, is to predict real life i.e. the resistance of a ship
running in a viscous fluid. These efforts have reached
considerable maturity for the case of the resistance
characteristics of displacement type hull forms,
including the free surface effect. Thus, the period of the
validation of the computer code results is about to
begin.
However, the real resistance problem in the pre-planing
or the planing speed region is not known (to the
authors) to have been tackled yet explicitly by the CFD
crowd. Therefore, the experimental results of the Series
will have to be compared to the wave resistance
component predicted by inviscid fluid codes. Two such
state-of-the-art codes, available at NTUA, were used
for the comparison, the SHIPFLOW code, Larsson,
1990 and the SWAN code, Sclavounos, 1992.
Unfortunately both codes do not provide for “break
point” treatment of the hard chine section shape
discontinuity and many section shape-defining points
had to be used to approximate the chine effect.
20.00
18.00
16.00
14.00
12.00
3
CR*10
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.00 0.20 0.40
Fig. 25a: Comparing experimental and analytical results (heavier displacements)
27
The predictions of the two numerical codes are
compared with the experimental results in Fig. 25a and
25b, keeping in mind that we are comparing the wave
resistance coefficient CW to the somewhat larger
residuary resistance coefficient CR. In Fig. 25a the
comparison is for the heavier displacements CDL=4.23,
3.62 and 3.00, which correspond to loading conditions
of smaller vessels. The comparison between the two
numerical codes is exceptionally good considering their
differences especially in the numerical techniques. At
the same time both methods predict consistently the
wave resistance somewhat smaller than the measured
residual resistance, as should be.
Unfortunately, the predictions of the numerical methods
seize to be reliable at the lighter displacements, i.e.
CDL=2.23, 1.61 and 1.00, which correspond to the
loading conditions of modern large fast passenger or
car-passenger ships.
L/B=5.50
CDL=3.00-Experimental
CDL=3.00-Swan
CDL=3.00-Shipflow
CDL=3.62-Experimental
CDL=3.62-Swan
CDL=3.62-Shipflow
CDL=4.23-Experimental
CDL=4.23-Swan
CDL=4.23-Shipflow
0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20
Fn
 8.00
L/B=5.50

CDL=1.00-Experimental
CDL=1.00-Swan
CDL=1.00-Shipflow
CDL=1.61-Experimental
CDL=1.61-Swan
6.00 CDL=1.61-Shipflow
CDL=2.23-Experimental
CDL=2.23-Swan
CDL=2.23-Shipflow
3
CR*10

4.00

2.00

0.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00

Fn
Fig. 25b: Comparing experimental and analytical results (lighter displacements)

The older and much simpler tool of Savitsky, 1964, was
found to give better results, Fig. 26, when used as
suggested by Savitsky et al, 1972, i.e. “use 20 0 as
(constant) deadrise angle, use the average beam of the
upper chine for the lower Fn’s and do not use for
speeds lower than Fn=0.62”. When these “engineering
approximations” are kept, the analytical predictions by
Savitsky’s method are very reasonable for CDL = 3.00
&2.23, but give lower values than the experimental
results for CDL = 1.61 & 1.00.

28
 12.00
L/B=5.50

CDL=1.00-Experimental
CDL=1.00-Savitsky's method
10.00
CDL=1.61-Experimental
CDL=1.61-Savitsky's method
CDL=2.23-Experimental
CDL=2.23-Savitsky's method
8.00
CDL=3.00-Experimental
CDL=3.00-Savitsky's method
3
CR*10

6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40

Fn
Fig. 26: Comparing experimental results to Savitsky’s method

6. DISCUSSION light loading conditions, i.e. values of CDL = 1.00, 1.61

The (residuary) resistance characteristics of the
systematic Series a double chine hull forms have been
presented for the pre-planing region, Fn. (0.50 to 0.90).
Although it was a University and mostly un-sponsored
(from the outside) project, the experiments were
conducted very carefully. Comparing the results from
the small models, the large models and the large
(parent) model in a different Towing Tank support this
claim. All these results have been used in presenting the
CR data, which is good enough to be shown in raw form
(for the time being).
The basic advantage of the NTUA double chine Series
is that they are based on a parent hull form of known
seaworthiness and good maneuvering characteristics.
This fact has been verified by sea trials as well as in the
Ship and Marine Hydrodynamics Laboratory of NTUA
(see e.g. Grigoropoulos and Loukakis, 1995). The
results of the extensive seakeeping tests of the Series
will be published in the near future. In the meantime
large ships with similar hull forms move in the choppy
waves of the Mediterranean Sea with “speed and
comfort”.
Another advantage of the NTUA Series is that its
results form an extensive grid, which contains very
& 2.23, which are absent from previous systematic
resistance series appropriate for monohull ships in the
aforementioned Fn range. This feature makes the Series
useful for the preliminary design of modern fast ships,
with lengths of the order of 100m and displacements of
the order of 1000 mt.
The resistance characteristics of the Series compare
favorably with other hull forms appropriate for the pre-
planing Fn range, while the proposed hull form possess
also a wide transom, present in all modern designs of
fast monohull ships.
Limited experiments in the planing Fn range, show that
the parent hull form behaves very well and in that
region, as its inventors intended.
Finally, it should be noted that no CFD code presently
available can provide the designer of fast monohull
ships with results certain to be valid, especially for the
light displacements of the modern large passenger ships
and ferries.

29
AKNOWLEDGEMENT
This work became possible due to the unpaid efforts of
very many students during the last 10 years. The
authors are heavily indebted to them.
From the rest of the crew of the facility, the efforts of
doctoral candidate Ms Dimitra Damala are greatly
appreciated. Doctoral candidate Vagelis
Papakonstantinou and Mr George Mylonas have also
helped a lot. Needless to say that the technical
personnel of the Towing Tank, Messrs Dionisis
Synetos, Fotis Kasapis & Giannis Trachanas are
responsible for the good quality of the measurements.
The authors are thankful to them and to Ms Katia
Georgiou who typed expertly the manuscript. Many
thanks are also due to the people of DERA at the Haslar
Tank.
The project was partially supported by the General
Secretariat for Research of Technology of the Ministry
of Development, the Large Facilities Program of the
E.U. and the Greek Navy. The authors are thankful for
this support.
REFERENCES
1. BAILEY, D. 1976 The NPL High Speed Round
Bilge Displacement Hull Series: Resistance,
Propulsion, Maneuvering and Seakeeping Data,
National Maritime Institute.
2. BLOUNT, D.L. and HANKLEY, D.W. 1976 Full-
Scale Trials and Analysis of High-Performance Planing
Craft Data, SNAME, Vol. 84, pp. 251-277.
3. CLEMENT, E.P. and BLOUNT, D.L. 1963
Resistance Tests of a Systematic Series of Planing Hull
Forms, Transactions SNAME, Vol. 71, pp. 491-579.
4. GALTIER, B. 1995 Speed and Comfort: A
Contract fully met, CARENES, Le Magazine du Bassin
d’ Essais des Carenes, No. 4, DCN, DGA.
5. GRIGOROPOULOS, G.J. and DAMALA, D.P.
2001 The Effect of Trim on the Resistance of High-
Speed Craft, HIPER ’01, Hamburg, May 2001.
6. GRIGOROPOULOS, G.J. and LOUKAKIS, T.A.
1999 Resistance of double-chine, large, high-speed
craft, Bulletin de L’ Association Technique Maritime et
Aeronautique ATMA, Vol. 99, Paris, June
7. GRIGOROPOULOS G.J. and LOUKAKIS, T.A.
1998, Seakeeping Characteristics of a Systematic Series
of Fast Monohulls, SMM’98, London, February 1998.
8. GRIGOROPOULOS G.J. and LOUKAKIS T.A.
and PEPPA, S. 1997 Seakeeping Performance of High-
Speed Monohulls, 6th IMDC ’97, Newcastle, June 1997.
9. GRIGOROPOULOS G.J. 1997 The Use of Spray
Rails and Wedges in Fast Monohulls, HSMV ’97,
Napoli, March 1997.
30
10. GRIGOROPOULOS, G.J. and LOUKAKIS, T.A.
1996 Effect of Wedges on the Calm Water Resistance
of Planing Hulls, MARIND ’96, Varna, Bulgaria, June
1996.
11. GRIGOROPOULOS G.J. and LOUKAKIS,
T.A.1995 Seakeeping Performance Assessment of
Planing Hulls, ODRA ’95, Szcezin, September 1995.
12. GRIGOROPOULOS G.J. and LOUKAKIS, T.A.
1995 Effect of Spray Rails on the Resistance of Planing
Hulls, FAST ’95, Travenmuende, Germany.
13. 21st International Towing Tank Conference, 1996
Final Report and Recommendations to the 21st ITTC,
High-Speed Marine Vehicles Committee, Trondheim,
Norway, pp. 515-560.
14. KANERVA, M. 2001 From Handy Size up to
Large Cruise Ferries, Elements Required to Design and
Build Successful Configurations, Euroconference,
Passenger Ship Design and Operation, Crete, October
2001, pp. 83-111.
15. KEUNING, J.A. and GERRITSMA, J. 1982
Resistance Tests of a Series of Planing Hull Forms with
25 Degrees Deadrise Angle, International Shipbuilding
Progress, Vol. 29, No. 337, September 1982, pp. 222-
249.
16. LEVANDER, K. 2001 Improving the ROPAX
Concept with High-Tech Solutions, Euroconference,
Passenger Ship Design and Operation, Crete, October
2001, pp. 45-62.
17. RADOJCIC, D., GRIGOROPOULOS, G.J.,
RODIC, T., KUVELIC T. and DAMALA, D. 2001 The
Resistance and Trim of Semi-Displacement, Double-
Chine, Transom-Stern Hull Series, FAST ’01,
Southampton 2001.
18. SAVITSKY D. and, BROWN, P.W. 1976
Procedures for Hydrodynamic Evaluation of Planing
Hulls in Smooth and Rough Water, Marine
Technology, Vol. 13, No. 4, October 1976, pp. 381-
400.
19. SAVITSKY, D., ROPER, J. and BENEN, L. 1972
Hydrodynamic Development of a High Speed Planing
Hull for Rough Water, 9th O.N.R. Symposium, Paris,
August 1972.
20. SAVITSKY D. 1964 Hydrodynamic Design of
Planing Hulls, Marine Technology, SNAME, Vol. 1,
No. 1, October 1964, pp. 71-95.
21. SHIPFLOW USERS MANUAL Revision 2.4,
1999 FLOWTECH, Gothenburg, Sweden, June 1999.
22. SWAN1 USER MANUAL Vs. 3.1 2000 Ship Flow
Simulation in Calm Water and in Waves, Boston
Marine Consulting Inc, Cambridge MA 02138, USA.
23. BRIZZOLARA S., BRUZZONE D., Fast Ships
Waves at different Bottom Depths, International
Maritime Association of the Mediterranean, Crete,
Hellas, May, 2002.
 APPENDIX I
Experimental Data

In the following Tables 1 to 5 the residual resistance

coefficient, running trim and C.G. rise, are shown. All
data is given in its raw form without any form of
smoothing. The residual resistance coefficient values
have resulted from the measured total resistance of the
model by subtracting the frictional resistance computed
using the I.T.T.C. 1957 formulation.
Each Table contains the results of a specific L/B value
at different CDL values. The distinction between small
and large model results as denoted by the letter S or L,
i.e. CDL=4.23 S or CDL=1.00 L. The results of the
experiments performed at DERA at Haslar, are denoted
by the additional letter D, i.e. CDL=1.00 L D.

31
 TABLE 1: L/B=4.00

CDL=1.00 L CDL=1.61 L CDL=2.23 L

Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G.

Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL
(deg) (%) (deg) (%) (deg) (%)
0.173 2.561 0.037 -0.021 0.172 2.841 0.018 -0.031 0.171 3.533 0.059 -0.029
0.260 2.760 0.092 -0.058 0.258 3.484 0.122 -0.083 0.257 4.577 0.155 -0.098
0.305 2.544 0.142 -0.090 0.344 3.456 0.279 -0.160 0.342 5.040 0.405 -0.211
0.349 2.258 0.171 -0.104 0.387 3.108 0.362 -0.187 0.385 4.621 0.522 -0.258
0.392 2.208 0.209 -0.128 0.430 2.936 0.493 -0.222 0.428 4.382 0.745 -0.306
0.434 2.176 0.338 -0.153 0.473 2.807 0.672 -0.238 0.471 4.116 0.967 -0.324
0.477 2.100 0.472 -0.165 0.516 2.667 0.825 -0.240 0.513 3.839 1.149 -0.316
0.521 2.065 0.568 -0.153 0.561 2.433 0.915 -0.200 0.556 3.426 1.250 -0.251
0.565 2.021 0.652 -0.135 0.604 2.295 0.959 -0.155 0.599 3.187 1.334 -0.194
0.609 1.950 0.676 -0.120 0.647 2.182 0.997 -0.083 0.643 2.961 1.378 -0.084
0.652 1.873 0.719 -0.063 0.688 2.055 1.007 0.000 0.685 2.736 1.375 0.014
0.696 1.823 0.733 -0.022 0.733 1.937 1.031 0.075 0.730 2.535 1.401 0.121
0.740 1.807 0.757 0.013 0.777 1.971 1.049 0.114 0.770 2.387 1.427 0.221
0.784 1.796 0.778 0.048 0.820 1.931 1.060 0.175 0.813 2.236 1.455 0.313
0.827 1.781 0.786 0.097 0.863 1.852 1.096 0.241 0.858 2.098 1.466 0.405
0.869 1.800 0.779 0.108

CDL=3.00 L CDL=3.00 S CDL=3.62 S

Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G.

Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL
(deg) (%) (deg) (%) (deg) (%)
0.170 4.357 0.078 -0.035 0.222 4.712 0.116 -0.102 0.220 5.523 0.068 -0.086
0.255 6.334 0.176 -0.128 0.276 5.743 0.182 -0.147 0.275 6.524 0.143 -0.142
0.341 7.299 0.461 -0.259 0.331 6.852 0.357 -0.221 0.330 7.557 0.325 -0.228
0.383 7.152 0.719 -0.340 0.385 6.975 0.641 -0.329 0.385 8.385 0.678 -0.358
0.426 6.783 1.000 -0.401 0.441 6.782 1.035 -0.406 0.441 8.369 1.123 -0.482
0.468 6.412 1.273 -0.426 0.496 5.871 1.385 -0.399 0.496 7.684 1.637 -0.488
0.511 5.899 1.540 -0.419 0.551 5.238 1.603 -0.316 0.550 6.757 1.863 -0.393
0.554 5.381 1.715 -0.357 0.607 4.469 1.712 -0.192 0.605 5.769 1.986 -0.257
0.596 4.917 1.828 -0.254 0.661 3.885 1.793 -0.063 0.659 5.104 2.059 -0.133
0.639 4.405 1.853 -0.135 0.717 3.465 1.842 0.031 0.715 4.449 2.133 -0.010
0.681 3.999 1.906 0.006 0.773 3.171 1.869 0.102 0.770 3.930 2.125 0.118
0.724 3.585 1.911 0.191 0.826 2.879 1.832 0.207 0.825 3.531 2.069 0.220
0.766 3.267 1.905 0.313 0.885 2.677 1.850 0.322 0.881 3.259 2.055 0.293
0.809 2.972 1.888 0.474 0.939 2.517 1.864 0.395 0.932 3.041 2.066 0.404
0.852 2.735 1.868 0.540 0.994 2.395 1.925 0.507 0.990 2.923 2.080 0.519
1.045 2.268 1.991 0.621 1.042 2.781 2.152 0.646
1.098 2.119 2.090 0.725 1.103 2.610 2.235 0.762
1.147 1.943 2.212 0.831 1.151 2.497 2.432 0.870

CDL=4.23 S

Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G.

Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL
(deg) (%) (deg) (%)
0.220 5.798 0.117 -0.103 0.713 5.515 2.345 -0.005
0.273 7.296 0.183 -0.174 0.767 4.807 2.277 0.106
0.328 8.278 0.352 -0.254 0.821 4.267 2.211 0.213
0.384 9.747 0.621 -0.380 0.877 3.803 2.179 0.336
0.440 10.404 1.284 -0.540 0.931 3.514 2.162 0.439
0.493 9.672 1.861 -0.559 0.985 3.312 2.141 0.577
0.548 8.569 2.112 -0.469 1.038 3.174 2.135 0.669
0.603 7.251 2.222 -0.283 1.100 3.112 2.179 0.811
0.657 6.374 2.325 -0.118 1.144 2.963 2.383 0.915

32
 TABLE 2 : L/B=4.75

CDL=1.00 L CDL=1.61 L CDL=2.23 L

Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G.

Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL
(deg) (%) (deg) (%) (deg) (%)
0.173 1.912 0.021 -0.017 0.171 2.628 0.054 -0.032 0.171 3.469 0.089 -0.069
0.259 2.145 0.067 -0.077 0.257 3.486 0.128 -0.090 0.256 4.643 0.159 -0.084
0.346 1.943 0.117 -0.099 0.343 3.392 0.288 -0.164 0.341 5.345 0.396 -0.220
0.389 1.929 0.155 -0.123 0.386 3.077 0.381 -0.199 0.384 4.841 0.536 -0.276
0.432 1.907 0.250 -0.154 0.429 3.000 0.532 -0.247 0.426 4.618 0.759 -0.342
0.477 1.870 0.382 -0.170 0.471 2.822 0.715 -0.271 0.469 4.382 1.000 -0.358
0.520 1.796 0.485 -0.174 0.514 2.654 0.871 -0.238 0.512 4.080 1.193 -0.366
0.565 1.769 0.566 -0.159 0.557 2.447 0.946 -0.226 0.554 3.688 1.316 -0.349
0.606 1.720 0.592 -0.130 0.600 2.204 0.990 -0.183 0.597 3.329 1.393 -0.273
0.651 1.623 0.629 -0.103 0.643 2.053 1.007 -0.127 0.641 3.013 1.398 -0.138
0.691 1.659 0.634 -0.073 0.686 1.925 1.033 -0.075 0.682 2.810 1.432 -0.029
0.738 1.620 0.644 -0.027 0.732 1.826 1.057 0.020 0.727 2.545 1.482 0.039
0.781 1.619 0.656 -0.006 0.775 1.735 1.093 0.084 0.770 2.351 1.522 0.144
0.824 1.633 0.685 0.029 0.818 1.663 1.123 0.127 0.812 2.200 1.532 0.222
0.867 1.636 0.689 0.045 0.860 1.632 1.131 0.171 0.853 2.096 1.514 0.302

CDL=3.00 L CDL=2.23 S CDL=3.00 S

Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G.

Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL
(deg) (%) (deg) (%) (deg) (%)
0.170 4.188 0.074 -0.048 0.220 3.508 0.095 -0.060 0.219 5.427 0.093 -0.091
0.256 5.683 0.160 -0.117 0.275 4.212 0.220 -0.101 0.273 6.389 0.164 -0.156
0.340 7.308 0.427 -0.259 0.329 5.377 0.385 -0.186 0.328 7.227 0.279 -0.214
0.382 7.597 0.677 -0.361 0.384 4.901 0.562 -0.255 0.382 7.249 0.616 -0.324
0.425 7.401 1.030 -0.436 0.440 4.578 0.860 -0.337 0.437 7.252 1.083 -0.444
0.468 7.010 1.358 -0.488 0.494 4.399 1.168 -0.340 0.492 6.650 1.500 -0.445
0.510 6.454 1.596 -0.491 0.549 3.890 1.294 -0.280 0.547 5.945 1.686 -0.388
0.553 5.896 1.776 -0.395 0.604 3.402 1.373 -0.187 0.601 5.058 1.752 -0.278
0.596 5.325 1.864 -0.311 0.659 2.971 1.428 -0.090 0.656 4.496 1.836 -0.145
0.638 4.799 1.922 -0.186 0.714 2.691 1.466 -0.020 0.712 3.987 1.876 -0.044
0.681 4.288 1.934 -0.014 0.768 2.482 1.476 0.035 0.765 3.530 1.870 0.008
0.723 3.839 1.956 0.084 0.822 2.362 1.499 0.096 0.819 3.179 1.860 0.076
0.765 3.472 1.955 0.222 0.878 2.206 1.499 0.173 0.877 2.888 1.841 0.186
0.808 3.151 1.926 0.301 0.933 2.092 1.500 0.249 0.929 2.727 1.806 0.242
0.851 2.893 1.892 0.392 0.987 2.088 1.493 0.301 0.983 2.686 1.807 0.337
1.043 2.008 1.502 0.381 1.039 2.521 1.808 0.431
1.096 1.949 1.520 0.439 1.092 2.494 1.836 0.499
1.143 1.753 1.585 0.493 1.123 2.428 1.886 0.536

CDL=3.62 S CDL=4.23 S

Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G.

Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL
(deg) (%) (deg) (%)
0.218 6.525 0.122 -0.053 0.218 6.198 0.117 -0.093
0.272 7.562 0.181 -0.143 0.271 8.217 0.174 -0.183
0.327 8.091 0.323 -0.228 0.326 9.743 0.315 -0.254
0.381 9.164 0.644 -0.342 0.380 10.359 0.600 -0.373
0.436 9.721 1.223 -0.502 0.434 11.693 1.277 -0.538
0.490 9.092 1.779 -0.527 0.489 11.449 2.026 -0.588
0.545 8.031 1.991 -0.450 0.544 10.152 2.270 -0.492
0.600 6.965 2.126 -0.317 0.598 8.756 2.468 -0.351
0.652 6.053 2.196 -0.180 0.651 7.623 2.512 -0.182

33
 0.708 5.264 2.223 -0.069 0.706 6.498 2.499 -0.062
0.763 4.597 2.204 0.030 0.760 5.619 2.453 0.015
0.817 4.153 2.186 0.146 0.814 4.949 2.387 0.138
0.873 3.693 2.162 0.254 0.868 4.496 2.358 0.252
0.926 3.512 2.131 0.320 0.922 4.178 2.341 0.370
0.980 3.320 2.109 0.450 0.978 3.881 2.333 0.490
1.036 3.176 2.132 0.544 1.029 3.695 2.355 0.599
1.091 3.061 2.183 0.640 1.084 3.386 2.425 0.675
1.145 2.978 2.270 0.717 1.130 3.361 2.516 0.767

TABLE 3 : L/B=5.50

CDL=1.00 L CDL=1.61 L CDL=2.23 L

Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G.

Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL
(deg) (%) (deg) (%) (deg) (%)
0.172 2.824 0.060 -0.030 0.171 2.276 0.101 -0.038 0.169 4.281 0.014 -0.036
0.259 3.295 0.150 -0.075 0.256 3.821 0.139 -0.085 0.212 4.723 0.078 0.062
0.345 2.564 0.204 -0.117 0.337 4.219 0.370 -0.154 0.255 5.193 0.131 -0.096
0.431 2.334 0.378 -0.163 0.427 3.413 0.624 -0.259 0.298 5.756 0.267 -0.153
0.517 1.988 0.595 -0.141 0.512 2.845 0.907 -0.253 0.340 6.203 0.396 -0.219
0.603 1.695 0.667 -0.126 0.598 2.307 1.039 -0.198 0.383 5.833 0.574 -0.296
0.690 1.364 0.659 -0.073 0.674 1.984 0.968 -0.137 0.426 5.518 0.812 -0.360
0.776 1.311 0.709 0.033 0.768 1.745 1.177 0.075 0.468 5.135 1.058 -0.393
0.862 1.207 0.684 0.106 0.854 1.614 1.073 0.198 0.511 4.714 1.246 -0.399
0.554 4.273 1.349 -0.350
0.597 3.884 1.452 -0.274
0.639 3.502 1.453 -0.164
0.682 3.142 1.410 -0.036
0.724 2.883 1.489 0.068
0.766 2.647 1.519 0.142
0.808 2.456 1.525 0.236
0.851 2.308 1.438 0.298

CDL=1.00 L D CDL=1.61 L D CDL=2.23 L D

Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G.

Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL
(deg) (%) (deg) (%) (deg) (%)
0.172 2.321 0.306 -0.047 0.171 3.221 -0.038 -0.009 0.170 4.032 0.057 -0.028
0.345 2.475 0.229 -0.086 0.341 4.309 0.306 -0.132 0.339 6.129 0.325 -0.177
0.517 1.835 0.516 -0.172 0.512 2.967 0.821 -0.187 0.509 4.624 1.146 -0.277
0.690 1.429 0.592 -0.046 0.683 2.072 0.955 -0.033 0.679 3.092 1.337 -0.069
0.776 1.400 0.611 -0.007 0.768 1.868 0.993 0.014 0.764 2.664 1.394 0.016
0.862 1.416 0.592 -0.016 0.854 1.718 1.050 0.043 0.849 2.334 1.432 0.064
0.948 1.485 0.688 -0.026 0.939 1.616 1.050 0.043 0.933 2.103 1.394 0.129
1.034 1.513 0.783 -0.035 1.024 1.590 1.069 0.024 1.018 1.982 1.394 0.158
1.121 1.518 0.821 -0.015 1.110 1.575 1.127 0.110 1.103 1.882 1.413 0.167
1.207 1.492 0.898 0.024 1.195 1.540 1.222 0.159 1.188 1.846 1.489 0.233
1.293 1.429 0.993 0.073 1.280 1.482 1.337 0.216 1.273 1.764 1.642 0.310
1.379 1.334 1.069 0.200 1.366 1.311 1.528 0.370 1.358 1.635 1.928 0.424
1.465 1.220 1.184 0.259 1.451 1.118 1.718 0.466 1.443 1.391 2.252 0.614
1.552 1.099 1.260 0.385 1.537 0.971 1.852 0.619 1.527 1.378 2.519 0.804
1.638 0.961 1.337 0.396 1.622 0.846 1.909 0.677 1.612 1.191 2.615 0.964
1.724 0.857 1.356 0.464 1.707 0.887 2.024 0.677 1.697 0.981 2.653 1.040
1.878 0.951 2.252 0.678 1.867 0.958 2.843 1.107
2.049 1.069 2.538 0.623 2.037 1.003 2.977 1.088

34
 CDL=3.00 S CDL=3.62 S CDL=4.23 S

Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G.

Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL
(deg) (%) (deg) (%) (deg) (%)
0.218 5.506 0.117 -0.073 0.218 4.630 0.092 -0.076 0.218 5.608 0.029 -0.092
0.327 7.687 0.294 -0.203 0.327 8.361 0.328 -0.219 0.327 8.925 0.226 -0.228
0.383 7.713 0.562 -0.277 0.436 10.147 1.162 -0.472 0.436 11.525 1.177 -0.522
0.436 8.193 1.110 -0.412 0.490 9.839 1.756 -0.531 0.490 11.766 1.975 -0.614
0.490 7.619 1.533 -0.429 0.545 8.678 2.016 -0.459 0.545 10.394 2.180 -0.534
0.545 6.521 1.735 -0.383 0.599 7.305 2.138 -0.334 0.599 8.926 2.342 -0.420
0.600 5.602 1.839 -0.293 0.654 6.313 2.201 -0.206 0.654 7.628 2.423 -0.267
0.654 4.840 1.869 -0.134 0.708 5.489 2.226 -0.104 0.708 6.506 2.451 -0.150
0.709 4.233 1.919 -0.071 0.763 4.842 2.248 -0.028 0.761 5.826 2.461 -0.082
0.763 3.753 1.913 0.003 0.817 4.261 2.222 0.093 0.817 5.101 2.405 -0.003
0.819 3.398 1.919 0.082 0.872 3.910 2.214 0.191 0.872 4.556 2.365 0.131
0.872 3.046 1.917 0.182 0.925 3.562 2.173 0.291 0.925 4.196 2.348 0.220
0.909 3.082 1.899 0.293 0.981 3.266 2.168 0.354 0.981 3.911 2.291 0.366
0.980 2.723 1.890 0.344 1.035 3.128 2.156 0.422 1.035 3.725 2.286 0.456
1.028 2.533 1.871 0.415 1.085 2.848 2.144 0.491 1.099 3.604 2.283 0.519
1.090 2.356 1.927 0.469 1.140 2.767 2.150 0.544 1.148 3.523 2.280 0.568
1.140 2.239 1.843 0.514

TABLE 4: L/B=6.25

CDL=1.00 L CDL=1.61 L CDL=2.23 L

Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G.

Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL
(deg) (%) (deg) (%) (deg) (%)
0.160 2.451 0.025 -0.018 0.159 2.903 0.048 -0.024 0.158 4.111 0.044 -0.034
0.240 3.156 0.102 -0.056 0.240 4.039 0.119 -0.068 0.237 5.258 0.119 -0.087
0.321 2.815 0.234 -0.110 0.318 4.780 0.316 -0.166 0.317 6.129 0.309 -0.181
0.361 2.440 0.271 -0.127 0.358 4.277 0.418 -0.220 0.356 6.264 0.441 -0.237
0.401 2.202 0.344 -0.152 0.399 3.869 0.534 -0.253 0.396 6.082 0.672 -0.319
0.441 2.016 0.467 -0.170 0.440 3.609 0.701 -0.302 0.435 5.810 0.939 -0.379
0.481 1.887 0.577 -0.191 0.479 3.364 0.885 -0.295 0.476 5.454 1.190 -0.419
0.522 1.755 0.648 -0.191 0.519 3.122 1.029 -0.278 0.517 5.006 1.373 -0.403
0.564 1.598 0.687 -0.145 0.558 2.846 1.079 -0.244 0.555 4.597 1.489 -0.342
0.604 1.501 0.731 -0.108 0.599 2.610 1.143 -0.204 0.596 4.129 1.554 -0.226
0.641 1.418 0.739 -0.029 0.636 2.384 1.149 -0.074 0.635 3.725 1.556 -0.137
0.684 1.307 0.744 0.011 0.676 2.151 1.177 -0.021 0.676 3.329 1.560 0.016
0.724 1.262 0.746 0.036 0.716 1.955 1.170 0.087 0.715 2.994 1.571 0.117
0.765 1.204 0.772 0.102 0.756 1.822 1.172 0.135 0.754 2.757 1.567 0.203
0.805 1.192 0.793 0.113 0.799 1.681 1.198 0.180 0.794 2.512 1.590 0.265

CDL=3.00 L CDL=1.61 S CDL=2.23 S

Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G.

Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL
(deg) (%) (deg) (%) (deg) (%)
0.157 4.220 -0.161 -0.045 0.206 3.644 0.065 -0.045 0.204 4.931 0.069 -0.070
0.236 6.188 0.111 -0.096 0.257 4.549 0.125 -0.077 0.256 5.974 0.083 -0.095
0.315 7.627 0.328 -0.200 0.309 4.859 0.240 -0.127 0.307 6.125 0.188 -0.150
0.356 7.953 0.456 -0.280 0.361 4.351 0.394 -0.188 0.359 6.555 0.378 -0.216
0.394 8.468 0.756 -0.368 0.412 4.039 0.516 -0.243 0.411 6.298 0.705 -0.306
0.435 8.874 1.190 -0.485 0.463 3.664 0.638 -0.295 0.460 5.886 1.014 -0.362
0.472 8.616 1.560 -0.546 0.514 3.237 0.874 -0.308 0.512 5.041 1.232 -0.338
0.513 7.909 1.800 -0.527 0.566 2.736 0.977 -0.246 0.564 4.301 1.375 -0.282

35
0.551 7.217 1.970 -0.457 0.617 2.370 1.032 -0.202 0.615 3.718 1.430 -0.189
0.593 6.343 2.021 -0.265 0.671 2.080 1.056 -0.164 0.665 3.283 1.461 -0.143
0.630 5.752 2.069 -0.116 0.720 1.864 1.081 -0.131 0.717 2.981 1.489 -0.078
0.669 5.096 2.085 0.017 0.772 1.767 1.125 -0.083 0.766 2.685 1.508 -0.031
0.708 4.576 2.091 0.162 0.823 1.640 1.179 -0.012 0.820 2.441 1.519 0.076
0.750 4.078 2.063 0.212 0.873 1.519 1.177 0.038 0.869 2.269 1.533 0.133
0.787 3.634 2.053 0.290 0.926 1.534 1.187 0.110 0.920 2.112 1.522 0.212
0.979 1.465 1.198 0.164 0.974 1.988 1.525 0.273
1.029 1.360 1.188 0.222 1.022 1.901 1.505 0.334
1.079 1.377 1.230 0.269 1.070 1.811 1.516 0.375

CDL=3.00 S CDL=3.62 S CDL=4.23 S

Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G.

Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL
(deg) (%) (deg) (%) (deg) (%)
0.203 4.767 0.081 -0.074 0.202 5.442 0.038 -0.063 0.202 5.336 0.090 -0.063
0.255 6.558 0.148 -0.110 0.253 6.921 0.130 -0.108 0.303 8.528 0.250 -0.191
0.305 7.074 0.229 -0.174 0.304 8.085 0.249 -0.177 0.404 10.584 0.777 -0.427
0.356 8.165 0.394 -0.242 0.357 9.094 0.423 -0.258 0.456 12.454 1.541 -0.577
0.408 8.899 0.803 -0.383 0.405 9.654 0.752 -0.386 0.507 11.830 2.091 -0.617
0.458 8.674 1.354 -0.498 0.456 10.905 1.523 -0.519 0.557 10.207 2.314 -0.484
0.509 7.793 1.619 -0.461 0.508 10.155 1.888 -0.515 0.606 8.865 2.428 -0.407
0.561 6.695 1.801 -0.356 0.558 8.869 2.076 -0.442 0.658 7.608 2.499 -0.283
0.612 5.746 1.860 -0.264 0.604 7.963 2.144 -0.352 0.709 6.600 2.493 -0.156
0.661 5.043 1.907 -0.196 0.660 6.676 2.235 -0.267 0.757 5.845 2.465 -0.044
0.713 4.489 1.943 -0.135 0.709 5.837 2.267 -0.181 0.808 5.169 2.421 0.115
0.762 3.987 1.969 -0.075 0.763 5.015 2.267 -0.012 0.860 4.602 2.364 0.206
0.820 3.559 1.962 0.085 0.814 4.544 2.265 0.069 0.909 4.174 2.312 0.305
0.863 3.206 1.946 0.151 0.862 4.145 2.219 0.170 0.963 3.823 2.276 0.382
0.916 2.996 1.924 0.264 0.914 3.768 2.177 0.272 1.015 3.552 2.231 0.401
0.965 2.754 1.893 0.320 0.962 3.449 2.148 0.363
1.021 2.560 1.893 0.390 1.013 3.284 2.108 0.427
1.068 2.277 1.908 0.424 1.062 3.070 2.124 0.469

TABLE 5 : L/B=7.00

CDL=1.00 L CDL=1.61 L CDL=1.61 S

Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G.

Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL
(deg) (%) (deg) (%) (deg) (%)
0.151 2.058 0.046 -0.013 0.150 1.916 0.054 -0.008 0.195 4.055 0.065 -0.040
0.227 2.846 0.115 -0.045 0.188 3.086 0.077 -0.034 0.244 4.566 0.125 -0.069
0.302 2.899 0.226 -0.102 0.225 3.828 0.114 -0.054 0.293 4.885 0.240 -0.114
0.341 2.377 0.267 -0.117 0.263 4.152 0.164 -0.087 0.342 4.771 0.394 -0.169
0.379 2.159 0.311 -0.139 0.300 4.541 0.249 -0.131 0.390 4.249 0.516 -0.218
0.417 2.007 0.408 -0.164 0.338 4.578 0.355 -0.183 0.439 3.882 0.638 -0.265
0.454 1.920 0.514 -0.173 0.375 4.066 0.435 -0.230 0.488 3.614 0.874 -0.277
0.493 1.779 0.595 -0.194 0.413 3.882 0.596 -0.292 0.538 3.216 0.977 -0.221
0.531 1.641 0.667 -0.181 0.450 3.674 0.794 -0.305 0.585 2.744 1.032 -0.181
0.570 1.536 0.709 -0.158 0.488 3.499 0.957 -0.343 0.634 2.308 1.056 -0.148
0.605 1.410 0.730 -0.079 0.525 3.257 1.091 -0.324 0.683 2.104 1.081 -0.118
0.646 1.326 0.753 -0.039 0.563 2.982 1.173 -0.277 0.731 1.903 1.125 -0.075
0.681 1.261 0.748 -0.003 0.600 2.677 1.179 -0.182 0.785 1.741 1.179 -0.011
0.721 1.175 0.736 0.055 0.638 2.418 1.180 -0.041 0.828 1.755 1.177 0.034
0.756 1.145 0.744 0.097 0.675 2.159 1.154 0.074 0.878 1.659 1.187 0.099
0.713 2.008 1.146 0.146 0.927 1.556 1.198 0.147
0.750 1.851 1.135 0.142 0.976 1.505 1.188 0.200
1.023 1.445 1.230 0.242

36
 CDL=2.23 S CDL=3.00 S CDL=3.62 S

Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G. Dynamic C.G.

Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL Fn CR103 trim rise/LWL
(deg) (%) (deg) (%) (deg) (%)
0.193 3.828 0.076 -0.048 0.191 4.965 0.010 -0.057 0.190 3.765 0.068 -0.040
0.241 5.128 0.146 -0.079 0.239 5.508 0.078 -0.097 0.286 7.176 0.227 -0.142
0.290 5.557 0.216 -0.131 0.287 6.845 0.197 -0.150 0.381 10.131 0.636 -0.312
0.338 6.361 0.347 -0.187 0.335 8.353 0.324 -0.213 0.429 11.386 1.190 -0.431
0.386 6.317 0.559 -0.260 0.383 8.484 0.567 -0.301 0.476 11.978 1.821 -0.525
0.435 6.109 0.959 -0.352 0.431 9.242 1.114 -0.435 0.524 10.740 2.149 -0.481
0.484 5.609 1.197 -0.365 0.478 9.105 1.583 -0.498 0.571 9.215 2.263 -0.371
0.531 5.056 1.361 -0.343 0.526 8.091 1.771 -0.471 0.619 8.069 2.361 -0.291
0.580 4.397 1.438 -0.276 0.574 7.023 1.876 -0.359 0.667 7.139 2.405 -0.175
0.628 3.900 1.465 -0.203 0.621 6.124 1.952 -0.323 0.714 6.349 2.417 -0.057
0.676 3.412 1.525 -0.167 0.670 5.431 2.006 -0.254 0.762 5.602 2.409 0.072
0.724 3.097 1.577 -0.135 0.718 4.818 2.043 -0.184 0.810 4.990 2.351 0.187
0.773 2.820 1.603 0.001 0.766 4.372 2.063 -0.063 0.857 4.448 2.312 0.316
0.822 2.530 1.599 0.070 0.813 3.922 2.046 0.049 0.905 4.048 2.284 0.402
0.869 2.347 1.615 0.154 0.861 3.594 2.026 0.172 0.952 3.716 2.271 0.469
0.916 2.146 1.597 0.218 0.909 3.174 2.016 0.253
0.966 2.060 1.597 0.272 0.957 2.917 1.988 0.319
1.007 1.774 1.592 0.299 1.008 2.820 1.982 0.356

CDL=4.23 S

Dynam C.G.
Fn CR103 ic trim rise/LWL
(deg) (%)
0.190 4.667 0.042 -0.044
0.237 5.838 0.090 -0.095
0.284 6.879 0.144 -0.158
0.332 10.126 0.307 -0.238
0.379 10.454 0.519 -0.345
0.427 12.425 1.088 -0.539
0.474 12.663 1.748 -0.613
0.522 11.903 2.232 -0.618
0.569 10.640 2.442 -0.560
0.616 9.265 2.542 -0.455
0.664 8.131 2.589 -0.348
0.711 7.112 2.576 -0.186
0.759 6.242 2.534 -0.066
0.806 5.525 2.472 0.073
0.853 4.931 2.395 0.180
0.901 4.485 2.362 0.252
0.948 4.131 2.322 0.304

37

View publication stats