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: drag asserted, lift reported), 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 2026-10-22 from commit 54caab2 2026-10-22 (with uncommitted changes under src/ or tests/); tests run 2026-10-22T08:19:44.257 (main entry) and 2026-10-22T08:34:15.500 (VALIDATION 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_VALIDATION.S3_StillWaterShapeWithProvisionalE NetValidation_LaderCage_Test.cpp:595 passed – –
NetValidation_LaderCage_VALIDATION.S4_DirectDuality NetValidation_LaderCage_Test.cpp:623 passed – –
NetValidation_LaderCage_VALIDATION.S4_FinalStatesMatchTheResultFile NetValidation_LaderCage_Test.cpp:612 passed – –
NetValidation_LaderCage_VALIDATION.S4_GridDuality NetValidation_LaderCage_Test.cpp:630 passed – –
NetValidation_LaderCage_VALIDATION.WritesReport NetValidation_LaderCage_Test.cpp:639 passed – –

Removed tests

Removed in the 2026-10-22 test audit (owner ruling 2026-10-22): DISABLED_ tests that failed against the current laws and had no open issue. Their facts are kept here; git log -S on the test's name recovers the code.

  • S3 drag at Sn 0.19 against KF2012 Fig. 14, 7 speeds, tolerance 20 %. Failed at 0.12 m/s only: 10.13 N against 8.1 N (+25.0 %); the other six rows -8.0 % to +10.3 % (2026-10-13, MF2022 Eq. 10 lift of MARE-0110; before it 10.13 N and -8.5 % to +10.2 %; before the twine friction of MARE-0111 10.03 N, +23.8 %, and -10.4 % to +9.0 %). Every model value lies above the measurement where it fails (tolerance 20 %). The default law's angle form is the open load-law item MARE-0131 (Q11); KF2012 find the same over-prediction for Sn 0.35 and 0.43 and attribute it to the angle harmonics a3, b4 (KF2012 section 3.3: -28 % drag for Sn 0.43 at 1 m/s from a3 = 0 to 0.1). At the lowest speeds the provisional E (still-water shape) and the Freeze schedule, whose round has not converged at Sn 0.35 and 0.43 when the loads are read, may add to it. Not tuned (R20).
  • S3 drag at Sn 0.35, 7 speeds, tolerance 20 %. Failed at 0.26 m/s only: 71.4 N against 57 N (+25.3 %); the other six rows -3.3 % to +13.0 % (2026-10-13, with the MF2022 Eq. 10 lift, about 30 % higher at this solidity; before it 72.0 N, +26.3 %, and +2.6 % to +18.3 %; before MARE-0111 71.34 N, +25.2 %, and +0.3 % to +13.1 %). Every model value lies above the measurement where it fails (tolerance 20 %). The default law's angle form is the open load-law item MARE-0131 (Q11); KF2012 find the same over-prediction for Sn 0.35 and 0.43 and attribute it to the angle harmonics a3, b4 (KF2012 section 3.3: -28 % drag for Sn 0.43 at 1 m/s from a3 = 0 to 0.1). At the lowest speeds the provisional E (still-water shape) and the Freeze schedule, whose round has not converged at Sn 0.35 and 0.43 when the loads are read, may add to it. Not tuned (R20).
  • S3 drag at Sn 0.43, 7 speeds, tolerance 20 %. Failed at 0.26 m/s, 84.1 N against 70 N (+20.1 %), and 0.93 m/s, 217.2 N against 173 N (+25.5 %); the other five rows -0.8 % to +16.4 % (2026-10-13, with the MF2022 Eq. 10 lift; before it four rows failed: 0.26 m/s 85.2 N +21.7 %, 0.65 m/s 192.7 N +20.5 %, 0.76 m/s 213.5 N +29.3 %, 0.93 m/s 244.3 N +41.2 %). The twine friction of MARE-0111 loads the cage walls parallel to the current; before it only 0.76 m/s (204.8 N, +24.0 %) and 0.93 m/s failed. Every model value lies above the measurement where it fails (tolerance 20 %). The default law's angle form is the open load-law item MARE-0131 (Q11); KF2012 find the same over-prediction for Sn 0.35 and 0.43 and attribute it to the angle harmonics a3, b4 (KF2012 section 3.3: -28 % drag for Sn 0.43 at 1 m/s from a3 = 0 to 0.1). At the lowest speeds the provisional E (still-water shape) and the Freeze schedule, whose round has not converged at Sn 0.35 and 0.43 when the loads are read, may add to it. Not tuned (R20).

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 0.05667, 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 0.05667 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, 8 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 10.67, error 31.698 %, 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 41.71, error 15.873 %, 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 76.95, error 12.992 %, 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 108.1, error 0.112 %, 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 150.2, error 10.477 %, 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 178.7, error 8.872 %, 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 219.1, error 15.302 %, 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 19.9, error 17.054 %, 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 74.95, error 31.485 %, 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 123.8, error 21.397 %, 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 155, error 8.377 %, 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 189.6, error 11.464 %, 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 212.2, error 17.903 %, 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 244.8, error 25.491 %, 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 24.02, error 19.491 %, 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 88.54, error 26.480 %, 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 137.6, error 14.696 %, 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 167.2, error 11.447 %, 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 200.6, error 25.381 %, 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 222.9, error 35.038 %, 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 256.6, error 48.306 %, tolerance ±20 %

Case Measured Model Error Tolerance Margin Result
Sn 0.19 U 0.12 k 0.05 drag [N] 8.1 10.67 31.698 % ±20.000 % -11.698 % outside
Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.05 drag [N] 36 41.71 15.873 % ±20.000 % 4.127 % within
Sn 0.19 U 0.39 k 0.05 drag [N] 68.1 76.95 12.992 % ±20.000 % 7.008 % within
Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.05 drag [N] 108 108.1 0.112 % ±20.000 % 19.888 % within
Sn 0.19 U 0.65 k 0.05 drag [N] 136 150.2 10.477 % ±20.000 % 9.523 % within
Sn 0.19 U 0.76 k 0.05 drag [N] 164.1 178.7 8.872 % ±20.000 % 11.128 % within
Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.05 drag [N] 190 219.1 15.302 % ±20.000 % 4.698 % within
Sn 0.35 U 0.12 k 0.05 drag [N] 17 19.9 17.054 % ±20.000 % 2.946 % within
Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.05 drag [N] 57 74.95 31.485 % ±20.000 % -11.485 % outside
Sn 0.35 U 0.39 k 0.05 drag [N] 102 123.8 21.397 % ±20.000 % -1.397 % outside
Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.05 drag [N] 143 155 8.377 % ±20.000 % 11.623 % within
Sn 0.35 U 0.65 k 0.05 drag [N] 170.1 189.6 11.464 % ±20.000 % 8.536 % within
Sn 0.35 U 0.76 k 0.05 drag [N] 180 212.2 17.903 % ±20.000 % 2.097 % within
Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.05 drag [N] 195.1 244.8 25.491 % ±20.000 % -5.491 % outside
Sn 0.43 U 0.12 k 0.05 drag [N] 20.1 24.02 19.491 % ±20.000 % 0.509 % within
Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.05 drag [N] 70 88.54 26.480 % ±20.000 % -6.480 % outside
Sn 0.43 U 0.39 k 0.05 drag [N] 120 137.6 14.696 % ±20.000 % 5.304 % within
Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.05 drag [N] 150 167.2 11.447 % ±20.000 % 8.553 % within
Sn 0.43 U 0.65 k 0.05 drag [N] 160 200.6 25.381 % ±20.000 % -5.381 % outside
Sn 0.43 U 0.76 k 0.05 drag [N] 165.1 222.9 35.038 % ±20.000 % -15.038 % outside
Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.05 drag [N] 173 256.6 48.306 % ±20.000 % -28.306 % 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)) -20 0 20 40 60 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 3.951, error 9.744 % 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 11.32, error -9.427 % 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 18.83, error -24.966 % 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 28.87, error -22.185 % 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 35.54, error -24.382 % 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 44.5, error -14.424 % 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 1.732, error 57.476 % 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 17.08, error 55.312 % 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 36.15, error 38.503 % 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 48.44, error 3.064 % 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 60.04, error -4.695 % 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 65.84, error -8.561 % 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 71.92, error -5.366 % 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 22.77, error 42.308 % 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 44, error 2.098 % 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 56.2, error -12.192 % 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 66.67, error -6.095 % 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 71.43, error -3.597 % 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 75.85, error -1.489 %

Case Measured Model Error Tolerance Margin Result
Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.05 lift [N] 3.6 3.951 9.744 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.39 k 0.05 lift [N] 12.5 11.32 -9.427 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.05 lift [N] 25.1 18.83 -24.966 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.65 k 0.05 lift [N] 37.1 28.87 -22.185 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.76 k 0.05 lift [N] 47 35.54 -24.382 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.05 lift [N] 52 44.5 -14.424 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.12 k 0.05 lift [N] 1.1 1.732 57.476 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.05 lift [N] 11 17.08 55.312 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.39 k 0.05 lift [N] 26.1 36.15 38.503 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.05 lift [N] 47 48.44 3.064 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.65 k 0.05 lift [N] 63 60.04 -4.695 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.76 k 0.05 lift [N] 72 65.84 -8.561 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.05 lift [N] 76 71.92 -5.366 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.12 k 0.05 lift [N] 0 2.687 ∞ – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.05 lift [N] 16 22.77 42.308 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.39 k 0.05 lift [N] 43.1 44 2.098 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.05 lift [N] 64 56.2 -12.192 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.65 k 0.05 lift [N] 71 66.67 -6.095 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.76 k 0.05 lift [N] 74.1 71.43 -3.597 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.05 lift [N] 77 75.85 -1.489 % – – 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 41.91, error 16.418 % 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 3.973, error 10.348 % 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 41.61, error 15.588 % 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 3.931, error 9.207 % 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 108.6, error 0.554 % 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 18.93, error -24.577 % 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 107.7, error -0.272 % 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 18.73, error -25.387 % 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 220.2, error 15.906 % 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 44.71, error -14.019 % 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 218.2, error 14.866 % 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 44.3, error -14.810 % 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 75.51, error 32.482 % 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 17.24, error 56.691 % 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 74.22, error 30.203 % 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 16.83, error 53.036 % 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 156.4, error 9.369 % 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 48.77, error 3.770 % 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 153.5, error 7.324 % 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 48.01, error 2.142 % 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 248.6, error 27.416 % 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 72.04, error -5.209 % 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 243.8, error 24.951 % 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 71.85, error -5.460 % 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 89.66, error 28.089 % 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 23.1, error 44.395 % 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 87.17, error 24.530 % 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 22.29, error 39.317 % 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 169.6, error 13.094 % 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 56.62, error -11.524 % 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 164.8, error 9.871 % 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 55.8, error -12.816 % 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 261.3, error 51.057 % 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 75.95, error -1.360 % 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 256.5, error 48.246 % 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 75.89, error -1.445 %

Case Measured Model Error Tolerance Margin Result
Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.03 drag [N] 36 41.91 16.418 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.03 lift [N] 3.6 3.973 10.348 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.08 drag [N] 36 41.61 15.588 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.08 lift [N] 3.6 3.931 9.207 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.03 drag [N] 108 108.6 0.554 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.03 lift [N] 25.1 18.93 -24.577 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.08 drag [N] 108 107.7 -0.272 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.08 lift [N] 25.1 18.73 -25.387 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.03 drag [N] 190 220.2 15.906 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.03 lift [N] 52 44.71 -14.019 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.08 drag [N] 190 218.2 14.866 % – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.08 lift [N] 52 44.3 -14.810 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.03 drag [N] 57 75.51 32.482 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.03 lift [N] 11 17.24 56.691 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.08 drag [N] 57 74.22 30.203 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.08 lift [N] 11 16.83 53.036 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.03 drag [N] 143 156.4 9.369 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.03 lift [N] 47 48.77 3.770 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.08 drag [N] 143 153.5 7.324 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.08 lift [N] 47 48.01 2.142 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.03 drag [N] 195.1 248.6 27.416 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.03 lift [N] 76 72.04 -5.209 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.08 drag [N] 195.1 243.8 24.951 % – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.08 lift [N] 76 71.85 -5.460 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.03 drag [N] 70 89.66 28.089 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.03 lift [N] 16 23.1 44.395 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.08 drag [N] 70 87.17 24.530 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.08 lift [N] 16 22.29 39.317 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.03 drag [N] 150 169.6 13.094 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.03 lift [N] 64 56.62 -11.524 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.08 drag [N] 150 164.8 9.871 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.08 lift [N] 64 55.8 -12.816 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.03 drag [N] 173 261.3 51.057 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.03 lift [N] 77 75.95 -1.360 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.08 drag [N] 173 256.5 48.246 % – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.08 lift [N] 77 75.89 -1.445 % – – 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 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 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 0.000143, 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 8.727e-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 0.0004501, 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 0.0006913, 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 0.001274, 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 0.002015, 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 0.002433, 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 0.000317, 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 0.001104, 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 0.001724, 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 0.00261, 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 0.0026, 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 0.002651, 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 0.001488, 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 0.00226, 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 0.004427, 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 0.004185, error 0.004 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 0.005212, error 0.005 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 0.008663, error 0.009 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 0.007757, 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 0.004884, error 0.005

Case Measured Model Error Tolerance Margin Result
Sn 0.19 U 0.12 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.000143 0 – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.26 k 0.05 steadiness 0 8.727e-05 0 – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.39 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.0004501 0 – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.50 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.0006913 0.001 – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.65 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.001274 0.001 – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.76 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.002015 0.002 – – reported
Sn 0.19 U 0.93 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.002433 0.002 – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.12 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.000317 0 – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.26 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.001104 0.001 – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.39 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.001724 0.002 – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.50 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.00261 0.003 – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.65 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.0026 0.003 – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.76 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.002651 0.003 – – reported
Sn 0.35 U 0.93 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.001488 0.001 – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.12 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.00226 0.002 – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.26 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.004427 0.004 – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.39 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.004185 0.004 – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.50 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.005212 0.005 – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.65 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.008663 0.009 – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.76 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.007757 0.008 – – reported
Sn 0.43 U 0.93 k 0.05 steadiness 0 0.004884 0.005 – – reported

S3 Freeze log lines (k 0.05):

Sn 0.19 U 0.12: Net: wake frozen at t = 14.0041 s after 3 rebuilds: max(max|dR|, |dM|/M) = 0.00914266 < WakeTolerance 0.01.
Sn 0.19 U 0.26: Net: wake frozen at t = 14.0094 s after 3 rebuilds: max(max|dR|, |dM|/M) = 0.00931293 < WakeTolerance 0.01.
Sn 0.19 U 0.39: Net: wake frozen at t = 17.0091 s after 4 rebuilds: max(max|dR|, |dM|/M) = 0.00600228 < WakeTolerance 0.01.
Sn 0.19 U 0.50: Net: wake frozen at t = 17.0064 s after 4 rebuilds: max(max|dR|, |dM|/M) = 0.00130918 < WakeTolerance 0.01.
Sn 0.19 U 0.65: Net: wake frozen at t = 17.0106 s after 4 rebuilds: max(max|dR|, |dM|/M) = 0.00204536 < WakeTolerance 0.01.
Sn 0.19 U 0.76: Net: wake frozen at t = 17.0145 s after 4 rebuilds: max(max|dR|, |dM|/M) = 0.00249332 < WakeTolerance 0.01.
Sn 0.19 U 0.93: Net: wake frozen at t = 17.0065 s after 4 rebuilds: max(max|dR|, |dM|/M) = 0.00260305 < 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| = 1.443e-13 (tolerance 1e-08, from the final states); max |dx|/D = 1.500e-15 and max |dv|/U = 2.945e-13 over the nodes (final states, reported); max |du_rel|/U at the 4 probes = 6.000e-08 (tolerance 1e-06, result file); smallest deficit behind the cage 0.1708; force in current (-142.444532, -0.082361, -80.617947) N.

S4 duality, Grid: |dF|/|F| = 1.859e-13 (tolerance 1e-03, from the final states); max |dx|/D = 1.294e-15 and max |dv|/U = 3.301e-13 over the nodes (final states, reported); max |du_rel|/U at the 4 probes = 8.000e-08 (tolerance 1e-03, result file); smallest deficit behind the cage 0.1692; force in current (-141.799856, -0.092761, -80.318825) 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