FhSim  3.1.0
Marine systems simulation
Loading...
Searching...
No Matches
Validation: Lader 2009 cages (S3, S4)

Table of Contents

Lader et al. (2009) deformable cages in current, as KF2012 report them (S3: still-water shape and drag asserted, lift reported; the 5 drag rows above +20 % have a known-deviation bound, MARE-0442), with the wake the cage casts, and the duality of the same cage in current and towed through still water (S4, no data). The E-modulus is PROVISIONAL (awaiting author).

Generated 2026-11-03 from commit dde2de1 2026-11-03; tests run 2026-11-03T17:50:17.205 (main entry), 2026-11-03T17:51:03.969 (datasets entry), 2026-11-03T17:52:23.737 (datasets VALIDATION entry) and 2026-11-03T17:52:33.442 (datasets DATAGEN entry).

Tests

Status from the gtest XML of the last run. A DISABLED_ test fails against the current laws; its numbers are in the tables below, and it stays disabled until the owner decides the issue.

Test Source Status Issues Owner question
NetValidation_LaderCage.S3_StillWaterShapeWithProvisionalE NetValidation_LaderCage_Test.cpp:596 passed – –
NetValidation_LaderCage.S4_DirectDuality NetValidation_LaderCage_Test.cpp:641 passed – –
NetValidation_LaderCage.S4_GridDuality NetValidation_LaderCage_Test.cpp:648 passed – –
Row/NetValidation_LaderCage_Fig14Drag_VALIDATION.S3_DragAgainstFig14/Sn019_U012 etc. (21 rows) NetValidation_LaderCage_Test.cpp slow tier, not run for this page MARE-0442 –
NetValidation_LaderCage_DATAGEN.WritesReport NetValidation_LaderCage_Test.cpp:657 passed – –
Pair/NetValidation_LaderCage_FinalStates.S4_FinalStatesMatchTheResultFile/DirectInCurrent NetValidation_LaderCage_Test.cpp:626 passed – –
Pair/NetValidation_LaderCage_FinalStates.S4_FinalStatesMatchTheResultFile/DirectTowed NetValidation_LaderCage_Test.cpp:626 passed – –
Pair/NetValidation_LaderCage_FinalStates.S4_FinalStatesMatchTheResultFile/GridInCurrent NetValidation_LaderCage_Test.cpp:626 passed – –
Pair/NetValidation_LaderCage_FinalStates.S4_FinalStatesMatchTheResultFile/GridTowed NetValidation_LaderCage_Test.cpp:626 passed – –

NetValidation LaderCage report

tests/out/NetValidation_LaderCage_report.txt, as the test wrote it.

NetValidation LaderCage report (plan S3, S4; MARE-0101). Deformable Net/NetStructure cage in current, default law, SolidityModel Fixed.

Conventions: error = model/measured - 1 (in %) for loads and coefficients, model - measured for ratios and localCd; ratio = measured/model; margin = tolerance - |error| (negative = fails).

BarE PROVISIONAL (awaiting author): 4e+06 Pa. Fluid rho 1025, nu 1.19e-06 (assumption). Cage 225 nodes, 416 panels, 16 bottom weights; tow k = 10000 N/m. Wake: Freeze at 8 s, every 3 s, blend 1 s, filter 1 s, grid 192, 48, 48 over 1 m; loads at 18 s.

S3 still-water shape, BarE PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)

6 rows, 0 of 3 outside the tolerance.

Model minus measurement per case with the tolerance band S3 still-water shape, BarE PROVISIONAL (awaiting author) S3 still-water shape, BarE PROVISIONAL (awaiting author) 0 1 2 3 4 model / measured − 1 [%]; shaded: tolerance Sn 0.19 still-water depth [m] S3 still-water shape, BarE PROVISIONAL (awaiting author): Sn 0.19 still-water depth [m]: measured 1.55, model 1.611, error 3.933 %, tolerance ±5 % Sn 0.19 arch of the unweighted nodes [m] S3 still-water shape, BarE PROVISIONAL (awaiting author): Sn 0.19 arch of the unweighted nodes [m]: measured 0, model 0.05848, error 0.058 % Sn 0.35 still-water depth [m] S3 still-water shape, BarE PROVISIONAL (awaiting author): Sn 0.35 still-water depth [m]: measured 1.55, model 1.609, error 3.794 %, tolerance ±5 % Sn 0.35 arch of the unweighted nodes [m] S3 still-water shape, BarE PROVISIONAL (awaiting author): Sn 0.35 arch of the unweighted nodes [m]: measured 0, model 0.05666, error 0.057 % Sn 0.43 still-water depth [m] S3 still-water shape, BarE PROVISIONAL (awaiting author): Sn 0.43 still-water depth [m]: measured 1.55, model 1.596, error 2.985 %, tolerance ±5 % Sn 0.43 arch of the unweighted nodes [m] S3 still-water shape, BarE PROVISIONAL (awaiting author): Sn 0.43 arch of the unweighted nodes [m]: measured 0, model 0.0455, error 0.046 %

Case Measured Model Error Tolerance Margin Result
Sn 0.19 still-water depth [m] 1.55 1.611 3.933 % ±5.000 % 1.067 % within
Sn 0.19 arch of the unweighted nodes [m] 0 0.05848 0.058 – – reported
Sn 0.35 still-water depth [m] 1.55 1.609 3.794 % ±5.000 % 1.206 % within
Sn 0.35 arch of the unweighted nodes [m] 0 0.05666 0.057 – – reported
Sn 0.43 still-water depth [m] 1.55 1.596 2.985 % ±5.000 % 2.015 % within
Sn 0.43 arch of the unweighted nodes [m] 0 0.0455 0.046 – – reported

S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %)

asserted; 21 rows, 5 of 21 outside the tolerance.

Model minus measurement per case with the tolerance band S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %) S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %) tolerance ±20 % -20 0 20 40 model / measured − 1 [%]; shaded: tolerance Sn 0.19 U 0.12 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.19 U 0.12 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 8.1, model 10.66, error 31.615 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 36, model 41.7, error 15.829 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.19 U 0.39 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.19 U 0.39 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 68.1, model 76.81, error 12.795 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 108, model 107.8, error -0.171 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.19 U 0.65 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.19 U 0.65 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 136, model 148.8, error 9.391 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.19 U 0.76 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.19 U 0.76 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 164.1, model 175.5, error 6.932 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 190, model 212.1, error 11.653 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.35 U 0.12 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.35 U 0.12 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 17, model 19.87, error 16.881 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 57, model 74.72, error 31.081 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.35 U 0.39 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.35 U 0.39 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 102, model 122.2, error 19.791 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 143, model 150.3, error 5.123 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.35 U 0.65 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.35 U 0.65 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 170.1, model 180.7, error 6.259 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.35 U 0.76 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.35 U 0.76 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 180, model 199.8, error 10.986 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 195.1, model 227.4, error 16.579 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.43 U 0.12 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.43 U 0.12 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 20.1, model 24.05, error 19.665 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 70, model 88.03, error 25.758 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.43 U 0.39 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.43 U 0.39 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 120, model 134.8, error 12.360 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 150, model 161, error 7.357 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.43 U 0.65 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.43 U 0.65 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 160, model 189.1, error 18.208 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.43 U 0.76 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.43 U 0.76 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 165.1, model 207.9, error 25.933 %, tolerance ±20 % Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.05 drag [N] S3 drag against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (asserted per net, +-20 %): Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.05 drag [N]: measured 173, model 237.7, error 37.417 %, tolerance ±20 %

Case Measured Model Error Tolerance Margin Result
Sn 0.19 U 0.12 k 0.05 drag [N] 8.1 10.66 31.615 % ±20.000 % -11.615 % outside
Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.05 drag [N] 36 41.7 15.829 % ±20.000 % 4.171 % within
Sn 0.19 U 0.39 k 0.05 drag [N] 68.1 76.81 12.795 % ±20.000 % 7.205 % within
Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.05 drag [N] 108 107.8 -0.171 % ±20.000 % 19.829 % within
Sn 0.19 U 0.65 k 0.05 drag [N] 136 148.8 9.391 % ±20.000 % 10.609 % within
Sn 0.19 U 0.76 k 0.05 drag [N] 164.1 175.5 6.932 % ±20.000 % 13.068 % within
Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.05 drag [N] 190 212.1 11.653 % ±20.000 % 8.347 % within
Sn 0.35 U 0.12 k 0.05 drag [N] 17 19.87 16.881 % ±20.000 % 3.119 % within
Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.05 drag [N] 57 74.72 31.081 % ±20.000 % -11.081 % outside
Sn 0.35 U 0.39 k 0.05 drag [N] 102 122.2 19.791 % ±20.000 % 0.209 % within
Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.05 drag [N] 143 150.3 5.123 % ±20.000 % 14.877 % within
Sn 0.35 U 0.65 k 0.05 drag [N] 170.1 180.7 6.259 % ±20.000 % 13.741 % within
Sn 0.35 U 0.76 k 0.05 drag [N] 180 199.8 10.986 % ±20.000 % 9.014 % within
Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.05 drag [N] 195.1 227.4 16.579 % ±20.000 % 3.421 % within
Sn 0.43 U 0.12 k 0.05 drag [N] 20.1 24.05 19.665 % ±20.000 % 0.335 % within
Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.05 drag [N] 70 88.03 25.758 % ±20.000 % -5.758 % outside
Sn 0.43 U 0.39 k 0.05 drag [N] 120 134.8 12.360 % ±20.000 % 7.640 % within
Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.05 drag [N] 150 161 7.357 % ±20.000 % 12.643 % within
Sn 0.43 U 0.65 k 0.05 drag [N] 160 189.1 18.208 % ±20.000 % 1.792 % within
Sn 0.43 U 0.76 k 0.05 drag [N] 165.1 207.9 25.933 % ±20.000 % -5.933 % outside
Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.05 drag [N] 173 237.7 37.417 % ±20.000 % -17.417 % outside

S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author))

reported; 20 rows, no tolerance.

Model minus measurement per case with the tolerance band S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)) S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)) -25 0 25 50 75 model / measured − 1 [%]; shaded: tolerance Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 3.6, model 4.527, error 25.758 % Sn 0.19 U 0.39 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.19 U 0.39 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 12.5, model 12.11, error -3.111 % Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 25.1, model 20.02, error -20.230 % Sn 0.19 U 0.65 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.19 U 0.65 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 37.1, model 31.53, error -15.010 % Sn 0.19 U 0.76 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.19 U 0.76 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 47, model 39.51, error -15.933 % Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 52, model 50.07, error -3.719 % Sn 0.35 U 0.12 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.35 U 0.12 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 1.1, model 2.003, error 82.117 % Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 11, model 18.2, error 65.423 % Sn 0.35 U 0.39 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.35 U 0.39 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 26.1, model 38.82, error 48.743 % Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 47, model 52.89, error 12.535 % Sn 0.35 U 0.65 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.35 U 0.65 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 63, model 65.49, error 3.946 % Sn 0.35 U 0.76 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.35 U 0.76 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 72, model 71.11, error -1.232 % Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 76, model 76.23, error 0.305 % Sn 0.43 U 0.12 k 0.05 lift [N] Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 16, model 24.23, error 51.421 % Sn 0.43 U 0.39 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.43 U 0.39 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 43.1, model 47.61, error 10.464 % Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 64, model 61.19, error -4.394 % Sn 0.43 U 0.65 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.43 U 0.65 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 71, model 71.91, error 1.287 % Sn 0.43 U 0.76 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.43 U 0.76 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 74.1, model 75.84, error 2.342 % Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.05 lift [N] S3 lift against KF2012 Fig. 14, k 0.05 (reported; E PROVISIONAL (awaiting author)): Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.05 lift [N]: measured 77, model 78.99, error 2.585 %

Case Measured Model Error Tolerance Margin Result
Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.05 lift [N] 3.6 4.527 25.758 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.39 k 0.05 lift [N] 12.5 12.11 -3.111 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.05 lift [N] 25.1 20.02 -20.230 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.65 k 0.05 lift [N] 37.1 31.53 -15.010 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.76 k 0.05 lift [N] 47 39.51 -15.933 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.05 lift [N] 52 50.07 -3.719 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.12 k 0.05 lift [N] 1.1 2.003 82.117 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.05 lift [N] 11 18.2 65.423 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.39 k 0.05 lift [N] 26.1 38.82 48.743 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.05 lift [N] 47 52.89 12.535 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.65 k 0.05 lift [N] 63 65.49 3.946 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.76 k 0.05 lift [N] 72 71.11 -1.232 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.05 lift [N] 76 76.23 0.305 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.12 k 0.05 lift [N] 0 3.102 ∞ – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.05 lift [N] 16 24.23 51.421 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.39 k 0.05 lift [N] 43.1 47.61 10.464 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.05 lift [N] 64 61.19 -4.394 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.65 k 0.05 lift [N] 71 71.91 1.287 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.76 k 0.05 lift [N] 74.1 75.84 2.342 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.05 lift [N] 77 78.99 2.585 % – – reported

S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported)

reported; 36 rows, no tolerance.

Model minus measurement per case with the tolerance band S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported) S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported) -20 0 20 40 60 model / measured − 1 [%]; shaded: tolerance Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.03 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.03 drag [N]: measured 36, model 41.9, error 16.384 % Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.03 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.03 lift [N]: measured 3.6, model 4.553, error 26.465 % Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.08 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.08 drag [N]: measured 36, model 41.6, error 15.550 % Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.08 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.08 lift [N]: measured 3.6, model 4.508, error 25.218 % Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.03 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.03 drag [N]: measured 108, model 108.3, error 0.251 % Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.03 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.03 lift [N]: measured 25.1, model 20.14, error -19.769 % Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.08 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.08 drag [N]: measured 108, model 107.4, error -0.542 % Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.08 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.08 lift [N]: measured 25.1, model 19.91, error -20.696 % Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.03 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.03 drag [N]: measured 190, model 213.1, error 12.147 % Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.03 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.03 lift [N]: measured 52, model 50.31, error -3.242 % Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.08 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.08 drag [N]: measured 190, model 211.6, error 11.343 % Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.08 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.08 lift [N]: measured 52, model 49.85, error -4.133 % Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.03 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.03 drag [N]: measured 57, model 75.26, error 32.041 % Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.03 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.03 lift [N]: measured 11, model 18.35, error 66.856 % Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.08 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.08 drag [N]: measured 57, model 74.01, error 29.835 % Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.08 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.08 lift [N]: measured 11, model 17.94, error 63.118 % Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.03 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.03 drag [N]: measured 143, model 151.4, error 5.907 % Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.03 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.03 lift [N]: measured 47, model 53.34, error 13.481 % Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.08 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.08 drag [N]: measured 143, model 149.2, error 4.362 % Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.08 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.08 lift [N]: measured 47, model 52.4, error 11.493 % Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.03 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.03 drag [N]: measured 195.1, model 230.7, error 18.248 % Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.03 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.03 lift [N]: measured 76, model 76.34, error 0.449 % Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.08 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.08 drag [N]: measured 195.1, model 226.6, error 16.142 % Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.08 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.08 lift [N]: measured 76, model 76.18, error 0.239 % Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.03 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.03 drag [N]: measured 70, model 89.09, error 27.274 % Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.03 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.03 lift [N]: measured 16, model 24.54, error 53.388 % Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.08 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.08 drag [N]: measured 70, model 86.72, error 23.886 % Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.08 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.08 lift [N]: measured 16, model 23.72, error 48.271 % Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.03 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.03 drag [N]: measured 150, model 163.1, error 8.724 % Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.03 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.03 lift [N]: measured 64, model 61.7, error -3.588 % Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.08 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.08 drag [N]: measured 150, model 159.1, error 6.092 % Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.08 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.08 lift [N]: measured 64, model 60.75, error -5.083 % Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.03 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.03 drag [N]: measured 173, model 241.5, error 39.617 % Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.03 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.03 lift [N]: measured 77, model 79.07, error 2.683 % Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.08 drag [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.08 drag [N]: measured 173, model 238, error 37.581 % Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.08 lift [N] S3 drag and lift at k 0.03 and 0.08 (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.08 lift [N]: measured 77, model 79.03, error 2.641 %

Case Measured Model Error Tolerance Margin Result
Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.03 drag [N] 36 41.9 16.384 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.03 lift [N] 3.6 4.553 26.465 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.08 drag [N] 36 41.6 15.550 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.08 lift [N] 3.6 4.508 25.218 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.03 drag [N] 108 108.3 0.251 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.03 lift [N] 25.1 20.14 -19.769 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.08 drag [N] 108 107.4 -0.542 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.08 lift [N] 25.1 19.91 -20.696 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.03 drag [N] 190 213.1 12.147 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.03 lift [N] 52 50.31 -3.242 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.08 drag [N] 190 211.6 11.343 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.08 lift [N] 52 49.85 -4.133 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.03 drag [N] 57 75.26 32.041 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.03 lift [N] 11 18.35 66.856 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.08 drag [N] 57 74.01 29.835 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.08 lift [N] 11 17.94 63.118 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.03 drag [N] 143 151.4 5.907 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.03 lift [N] 47 53.34 13.481 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.08 drag [N] 143 149.2 4.362 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.08 lift [N] 47 52.4 11.493 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.03 drag [N] 195.1 230.7 18.248 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.03 lift [N] 76 76.34 0.449 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.08 drag [N] 195.1 226.6 16.142 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.08 lift [N] 76 76.18 0.239 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.03 drag [N] 70 89.09 27.274 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.03 lift [N] 16 24.54 53.388 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.08 drag [N] 70 86.72 23.886 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.08 lift [N] 16 23.72 48.271 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.03 drag [N] 150 163.1 8.724 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.03 lift [N] 64 61.7 -3.588 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.08 drag [N] 150 159.1 6.092 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.08 lift [N] 64 60.75 -5.083 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.03 drag [N] 173 241.5 39.617 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.03 lift [N] 77 79.07 2.683 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.08 drag [N] 173 238 37.581 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.08 lift [N] 77 79.03 2.641 % – – reported

S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported)

reported; 21 rows, no tolerance.

Model minus measurement per case with the tolerance band S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported) S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported) 0 0.0025 0.005 0.0075 0.01 model − measured; shaded: tolerance Sn 0.19 U 0.12 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.12 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.0001384, error 0.000 Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 9.534e-05, error 0.000 Sn 0.19 U 0.39 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.39 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.0004824, error 0.000 Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.0007, error 0.001 Sn 0.19 U 0.65 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.65 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.001326, error 0.001 Sn 0.19 U 0.76 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.76 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.002084, error 0.002 Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.002428, error 0.002 Sn 0.35 U 0.12 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.12 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.0002584, error 0.000 Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.0009316, error 0.001 Sn 0.35 U 0.39 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.39 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.002156, error 0.002 Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.002701, error 0.003 Sn 0.35 U 0.65 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.65 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.002538, error 0.003 Sn 0.35 U 0.76 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.76 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.002552, error 0.003 Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.0009815, error 0.001 Sn 0.43 U 0.12 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.12 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.001799, error 0.002 Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.003518, error 0.004 Sn 0.43 U 0.39 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.39 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.004726, error 0.005 Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.006401, error 0.006 Sn 0.43 U 0.65 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.65 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.009729, error 0.010 Sn 0.43 U 0.76 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.76 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.008028, error 0.008 Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.05 steadiness S3 steadiness of the tow force over the last 2 s (reported): Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.05 steadiness: measured 0, model 0.003874, error 0.004

Case Measured Model Error Tolerance Margin Result
Sn 0.19 U 0.12 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.0001384 0 – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.05 steadiness 0 9.534e-05 0 – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.39 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.0004824 0 – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.0007 0.001 – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.65 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.001326 0.001 – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.76 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.002084 0.002 – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.002428 0.002 – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.12 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.0002584 0 – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.0009316 0.001 – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.39 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.002156 0.002 – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.002701 0.003 – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.65 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.002538 0.003 – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.76 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.002552 0.003 – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.0009815 0.001 – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.12 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.001799 0.002 – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.003518 0.004 – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.39 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.004726 0.005 – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.006401 0.006 – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.65 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.009729 0.01 – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.76 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.008028 0.008 – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.003874 0.004 – – reported

S3 Freeze log lines (k 0.05):

Sn 0.19 U 0.12: Net: wake frozen at t = 14.0038 s after 3 rebuilds: max(max|dR|, |dM|/M) = 0.00905924 < WakeTolerance 0.01.
Sn 0.19 U 0.26: Net: wake frozen at t = 14.0076 s after 3 rebuilds: max(max|dR|, |dM|/M) = 0.00707834 < WakeTolerance 0.01.
Sn 0.19 U 0.39: Net: wake frozen at t = 17.0078 s after 4 rebuilds: max(max|dR|, |dM|/M) = 0.00554012 < WakeTolerance 0.01.
Sn 0.19 U 0.50: Net: wake frozen at t = 17.0042 s after 4 rebuilds: max(max|dR|, |dM|/M) = 0.00129366 < WakeTolerance 0.01.
Sn 0.19 U 0.65: Net: wake frozen at t = 17.0075 s after 4 rebuilds: max(max|dR|, |dM|/M) = 0.00221827 < WakeTolerance 0.01.
Sn 0.19 U 0.76: Net: wake frozen at t = 17.0075 s after 4 rebuilds: max(max|dR|, |dM|/M) = 0.00269416 < WakeTolerance 0.01.
Sn 0.19 U 0.93: Net: wake frozen at t = 17.0043 s after 4 rebuilds: max(max|dR|, |dM|/M) = 0.00280141 < WakeTolerance 0.01.
Sn 0.35 U 0.12: no freeze line
Sn 0.35 U 0.26: no freeze line
Sn 0.35 U 0.39: no freeze line
Sn 0.35 U 0.50: no freeze line
Sn 0.35 U 0.65: no freeze line
Sn 0.35 U 0.76: no freeze line
Sn 0.35 U 0.93: no freeze line
Sn 0.43 U 0.12: no freeze line
Sn 0.43 U 0.26: no freeze line
Sn 0.43 U 0.39: no freeze line
Sn 0.43 U 0.50: no freeze line
Sn 0.43 U 0.65: no freeze line
Sn 0.43 U 0.76: no freeze line
Sn 0.43 U 0.93: no freeze line

S4 duality, Direct: |dF|/|F| = 1.272e-13 (tolerance 1e-08, from the final states); max |dx|/D = 2.174e-15 and max |dv|/U = 2.670e-13 over the nodes (final states, reported); max |du_rel|/U at the 4 probes = 2.000e-08 (tolerance 1e-06, result file); smallest deficit behind the cage 0.1654; force in current (-141.825454, -0.061135, -78.662142) N.

S4 duality, Grid: |dF|/|F| = 1.427e-13 (tolerance 1e-03, from the final states); max |dx|/D = 1.531e-15 and max |dv|/U = 3.087e-13 over the nodes (final states, reported); max |du_rel|/U at the 4 probes = 6.000e-08 (tolerance 1e-03, result file); smallest deficit behind the cage 0.1637; force in current (-141.188882, -0.077084, -78.380572) N.

Data provenance

Every measured number in the tables above comes from these files (contract C6); the header of each gives the paper, the table or figure, how it was obtained and its uncertainty.

lader2009_kf2012_tables1-2.csv

tests/data/lader2009_kf2012_tables1-2.csv, 3 rows.

Field Value
source Lader P, Moe H, Jensen O, Lien E (2009), Noter med hoy soliditet - modellforsok, SINTEF Fisheries and Aquaculture technical report (in Norwegian); available only via Kristiansen T, Faltinsen OM (2012), J. Fluids Struct. 34, 218-235 (KF2012)
location KF2012 Table 1 (sn, dw, lw) and Table 2 (nominal D, L, bottom weights), journal p. 228, PDF p. 11; bottom-weight count from KF2012 Fig. 11 caption and p. 232
kind tabulated
uncertainty as published (values copied exactly); KF2012 Table 2 assigns the experimental uncertainties Sn +-10 %, D +-5 %, L +-5 %, dw +-20 %, T_bw +-5 %
units sn [-], dw_mm [mm], lw_mm [mm], d_m [m], l_m [m], n_bw [-], m_bw_kg [kg], t_bw_N [N], cd_bw [-]
notes The Lader 2009 report is not in background/; everything here is KF2012's account of it. Circular deformable net cages in the Hirtshals flume, 16 bottom weights of 0.6 kg (T_bw0 = 0.875 m_bw g = 5.15 N in water, g = 9.81 m/s2), C_Dbw0 = 0.66 (Blevins, via KF2012).
notes Depth: the KF2012 text (p. 228) says "diameter D = 1.75 m and depth 1.5 m", while Table 2 gives L0 = 1.55 m; l_m is the Table 2 value.
notes E-modulus PROVISIONAL (awaiting author): Table 2 lists the variation "0.2 x 10^6" with no unit (nominal E = infinity), the text (p. 229) says "E = 0.2 Pa gave similar initial conditions"; the most likely reading is 0.2 MPa, a shape-matching device, not a material property. Not a column.
notes Net weight in water not reported (KF2012 p. 230 estimate 4-5 N per net from rho_net = 1130 kg/m3 of Lader and Enerhaug 2005). Inflow 10-12 % higher at the top than at the bottom in the same flume (KF2012 §3.2.1).
sn dw_mm lw_mm d_m l_m n_bw m_bw_kg t_bw_N cd_bw
0.19 2.42 25.5 1.75 1.55 16 0.6 5.15 0.66
0.35 1.41 8.3 1.75 1.55 16 0.6 5.15 0.66
0.43 1.35 5.8 1.75 1.55 16 0.6 5.15 0.66

lader2009_kf2012fig14_digitised.csv

tests/data/lader2009_kf2012fig14_digitised.csv, 21 rows.

Field Value
source Lader P, Moe H, Jensen O, Lien E (2009), SINTEF Fisheries and Aquaculture technical report (in Norwegian); available only via Kristiansen T, Faltinsen OM (2012), J. Fluids Struct. 34, 218-235 (KF2012)
location KF2012 Fig. 14, experimental markers ("Drag, experiments" filled squares, "Lift, experiments" filled circles), journal p. 231, PDF p. 14
kind digitised
uncertainty +-0.5 N and +-0.005 m/s (marker centres read from the PDF vector drawing, axes calibrated on the tick marks; not eye-read). The measurement uncertainty itself is not stated; KF2012 treat +-20 % as their total model-plus-experiment band.
units sn [-], u_m_s [m/s], drag_N [N], lift_N [N]
notes The Lader 2009 report is not in background/; these are KF2012's plotted experimental points. The Morison-model diamonds and the KF2012 simulation curves are not included. Cage data: lader2009_kf2012_tables1-2.csv.
notes nan = no marker in the figure (Sn = 0.19 has no lift marker at 0.12 m/s). The read-off values lie within 0.1 N of whole newtons, which suggests the plotted data were integers.
sn u_m_s drag_N lift_N
0.19 0.12 8.1 nan
0.19 0.26 36.0 3.6
0.19 0.39 68.1 12.5
0.19 0.50 108.0 25.1
0.19 0.65 136.0 37.1
0.19 0.76 164.1 47.0
0.19 0.93 190.0 52.0
0.35 0.12 17.0 1.1
0.35 0.26 57.0 11.0
0.35 0.39 102.0 26.1
0.35 0.50 143.0 47.0
0.35 0.65 170.1 63.0
0.35 0.76 180.0 72.0
0.35 0.93 195.1 76.0
0.43 0.12 20.1 0.0
0.43 0.26 70.0 16.0
0.43 0.39 120.0 43.1
0.43 0.50 150.0 64.0
0.43 0.65 160.0 71.0
0.43 0.76 165.1 74.1
0.43 0.93 173.0 77.0

lader2009_cage_model.csv

tests/in/NetValidation/lader2009_cage_model.csv, 3 rows.

Field Value
source model choices of plan test S3 (NetValidation_LaderCage_Test.cpp, MARE-0101, WP-D2) for the Lader et al. (2009) cages of tests/data/lader2009_kf2012_tables1-2.csv; not a measurement
location KF2012 §3.2.2 (journal p. 229, PDF p. 12) for the still-water shape the E-modulus is chosen to give; plan Decisions 4
kind text
uncertainty e_pa is PROVISIONAL (awaiting author); KF2012 found that E does not affect drag and affects lift below 0.4 m/s (KF2012 Fig. 18)
units sn [-], e_pa [Pa]
notes E-modulus PROVISIONAL (awaiting author). KF2012 Table 2 lists "0.2 x 10^6" (no unit) and the text "E = 0.2 Pa gave similar initial conditions": a shape-matching device, not a material property (plan Decisions 4). In this model BarE is the twine's modulus (bar stiffness E pi BarD^2/4 per twine); 0.2 MPa stretches the still-water cage to 2.26 m (Sn 0.19) against L0 = 1.55 m, 2 MPa to +7 %. The value below is the smallest round value that keeps the still-water depth within the +-5 % KF2012 Table 2 band on L (3.9 %, 3.8 %, 3.0 % deeper) while the unweighted bottom-ring nodes arch 5-6 cm above the weighted ones (the lower part of the net arches under the bottom weights, KF2012 §3.2.2); S3_StillWaterShapeWithProvisionalE checks both.
notes fluid rho = 1025 kg/m3, nu = 1.19e-6 m2/s: the NetStructure defaults. KF2012 do not state the flume water; an assumption, reported as an owner question.
notes The cage has a flat bottom net (assumption: KF2012 Figs. 13 and 16 show a closed cage; the bottom is not described). Twine neutrally buoyant (KF2012 did not model the net weight, §3.2.2). The 16 bottom weights are constant forces T_bw on every second node of the 32-node bottom ring; their drag (KF2012 nominal C_Dbw = 0.66) is not modelled (the KF2012 variation C_Dbw = 0).
sn e_pa
0.19 4e6
0.35 4e6
0.43 4e6