UNCLASSIFIED AD NUMBER

ADA800144

CLASSIFICATION CHANGES
TO: unclassified

FROM:

confidential

LIMITATION CHANGES
TO: Approved for public release, unlimited distribution

FROM: Distribution authorized to U.S. Gov't. agencies and their contractors; Administrative/Operational Use; Apr 1950. Other requests shall be referred to David W. Taylor Model Basin, Washington, DC.

AUTHORITY
30 Apr 1962 per DoDD 5200.10; David W. Taylor Naval Ship R&D Ctr ltr, 1 Feb 1972

THIS PAGE IS UNCLASSIFIED

AD
DEFENSE DOCUMENTA'
FOR

SCIENTIFiC AND TECHNICA..

CAMEPON STATION kLEX ,,,,.v ..

DC;70D0 AT 3 YLAR INTERVALS: DE!-LASSIFIED UEfR 12 YEARS DOD EIR 52`03 to

LA I U NCLA3W I F I E D

Re~produced
C Tflgi i
WIGHT-PATTERSON

6~y
flflIf.00CUM nTS 0ff I C

AIR FORCE BASE- 0AYTON.OHIO

U~iIS

ABSOLVDOUfOI
N

lohl

L~~~~~~~ITIAINWIHMYESEFO

IFIN
IHC'*

INTONDMETC
-,Y E NV LVD

R OEINPAEN

IGT

I'

Y1

j-

-1'

ROSIahw6 etLM-rO&ea y'stematic Series o Streamlined Bodies of Rev'utAv - orAllIfeata to tOe Deslg. C si gh-Spee Sbaulnes - &nd Appewlndia 1,-I Gertler, Morton Taylor, David W. oeWel aslas, Wash., D. C.
S(Same)

ae

C-297 (Same)

Apr 'IS

Ccltd'l

U.S.

SWgUMh

144

photo, ta-..i,

ftagrs, grapbs

O.elstance tet were made n varaios sdapes ce mathematically related, ,treamllned bodies-of-revo. lutlom In orer to provide basic data far the hull desai of blg -sbmerged-upeed msbmarInes. The a Prlmary puposea ON the resistance tests was to determln he effects upn sbmergsd r*eistace, al t eVarlation of five selected geometrical paramete which can be used to defin teno anie df streamlimed bodles--revludtm. The charateritic and derivation of the serles fe rms are given; 66 methods ed testing are described In detail; the technies for t# rwtlou of model data and etods for predicting prototype performance are explained; and s.ggested caideratlema for the Seluctiom CC the miaimum resistance form for applcatiom to Wumarin desiga are gives. The resWt d tests al four models at near-surface or mmorkelling coaditions are also given to sdew their effect upon the final selectioa of the Optimum form.
Water-Downe Aircraft (21)

Rout reqests for copies to CADO thre Originating Agency.

Dodles of revolution
-

ydodmaleTheoary (1)
Navy Materiel (28) Marine Engineering (6)

Hydrawdgnamlics
Iwols, OWp thls - Design

T/
. iFl'." -'i:!,'-?I"I TI
-,

Submarnes

IlI

m~

I II

ll

I l

Il[

NAVY DEPARTMENT
THE DAVID W. 'TAYLOR MODEL BASIN
WASHINGTON

7,

D.C.

RESISTANCE EXPERIMENTS ON A SYSTEMATIC SERIES OF STREAMLINED BODIES OF REVOLUTION-FOR APPLICATION TO THE DESIGN OF HIGH-SPEED SUBMARINES
by Morton Gertler

April 1950

Report C-297 NS 715-080

INITIAL DISTRIBUTION Serials 1 - 20 Chief, BuShips, Project Records (Code 362), for distribution: 1 - 5 Project Records

6 Deputy and Asst. Chief (Code 101) 7 Technical Asst. to Chief (Code 106)
8 9 Research (Code 330) Applied Science (Code 370) Ship Design (Code 410) Preliminary Design (Code 420)

"10
11
-

12

"13 Submarines (Code 515)

14 Landing Craft (Code 519) 15 Minesweeping (Code 620) 16 Torpedo Countermeasures (Code 6 20c) 17 Auxiliary Machinery (Code 611.7) 18 Propellers and Shafting (Code 654) 19 Internal Communication and Fira Control (Code 665) 20 Sonar (Code 940) 21 22 23 24
-

Commander, Submarine Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet Commander, Submarine Force, U.S. Pacific Fleet Chief, BuAer, Aero and Hydrodynamics (DE-3) Chief, Bureau of Ordnance, Research (Re6) Chief of Naval Research, Fluid Mechanics Branch Executive Secretary, Research and Development Board, Pentagon, Washington 25, D.C. Commander, Naval Ordnance. Laboratory, Silver Spring, Md. Director, Naval Research Laboratory, Washington 25, D.C. Commander, Naval Ordnance Test Station, Underwater Ordnance Division, Pasadena, Calif. Commanding Officer and Director, U.S. Navy Underwater Sound Laboratory, Fort Trumbull, New London, Conn. Commanding Officer and Director, U.S. Navy Electronics Laboratory, San Diego 52, Calif. Commanding Officer, U.S. Naval Torpedo Station, Newport, R.I. Commander, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, New Hampshire

25 26 27

28

29 30 31 32 33 34 35

Serials 36 3738 Commander, Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Vallejo, Calif. Supervisor of Shipbuilding, USN and Naval Inspector of Ordnance, Electric Boat Co., Groton, Conn.; one copy fo, Rear Admiral A.I. McKee, USN (Ret.), Member, Panel on th( . 1rodynamics of Electric Boat Submerged Bodies and Assistant General Manal Co. U.S. Navy Inspector of Machinery, General Electric Co., Schenectady 1, N.Y., for Mr. W. Vermeulen, General Electric Co. Iispector of Naval Material, 1060 Broad St., Newark, N.J., for Dr. K.S.M. Davidson, Chairman, Panel on the Hydrodynamics of Submerged Bodies, Stevens Institute and for the Experimental Towing Tank, Stevens Institute of Technology, 711 Hudson St., Hoboken, N.J. Inspector of Naval Material, 1206 South Santee St., Los Angeles 15, Calif., for Dr. R.T. Knapp, Director, Hydrodynamic Laboratories, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, Calif. Inspentor of Naval Material, 495 Summer St., Boston 10, Mass., for Vice Admiral E.L. Cochrane USN (Ret.), Member, Panel on the Hydrodynamics of Submerged Bodies and Head, Dept. of Naval Architecture, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass., and for Director, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Mass. Inspector of Naval Material, 401 Water St., Baltimore 2, Md., for Dr. G.F. Wislicenus, Member, Panel on the Hydrodynamics of Submerged Bodies and Chairman, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md. Inspector of Naval Material, 17 Brief Ave., Upper Darby, Pa., for Director, Ordnance Research Laboratory, Pennsylvania State College, State College, Pa. 47 Supervisor of Shipbuilding, USN and Naval Inspector of Ordnance, 11 Broadway, New York It, N.Y., for Rear Admiral P.F. Lee, USN (Ret.), Member, Panel on the Hydrodynamics of Submerged Bodies and Vice President, Gibbs an6 Cox, Inc., New York. Director of Aeronautical Research, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, 1724 F St., N.W., Washington 25, D.C.

39
1

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

48

CONFIDENTIAL

Serials
49 Mr. F.L. Thompson, Member, Panel on the Hydrodynamics of Submerged Bodies and Director of Research, Langley Memorial Aeronautical laboratory, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Langley Field, Va. 50 Captain W.S. Diehl, USN, Associate Member, Panel on the Hydrodynamics of Submerged Bodies, Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Dept., Washington, D.C. Commanding Officer, Naval Training Schools, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge 39, Mass. Commanding Officer, Branch Office, U.S. Navy, Office of Naval Research, 495 Summer Street, Boston 10, Mass. Commanding Officer, Branch Office, U.S. Navy, Office of Naval Research, 50 Church Street, New York 7, N.Y. Commanding Officer, Branch Office, U.S. Navy, Office of Naval Research, 8411 North Rush Street, Chicago 11, Illinois

51
52

53
54

55 56 57
-

Commanding Officer, Branch Office, U.S. Navy, Office of Naval Research, 801 Donahue Street, San Francisco 24, Calif. Commanding Officer, Branch Office, U.S. Navy, Office of Naval Research, 1080 East Green Street, Pasadena 1, Calif. Assistant Naval Attache for Research, U.S. Navy, Office of Naval P.esearch, American Embassy, London, England, Navy 100, FPO, New York, N.Y.

58

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

RESISTANCE EXPERIMENTS ON A SYSTEMATIC SERIES OF STREAMLINED BODIES OF REVOLUTION-FOR APPLICATION TO THE DESIGN OF HIGH-SPEED SUBMARINES

by

Morton Gertler

"This document contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning o( the Espionage Laws, Title 18, U.S. C., Sections 793 and 794. The transmission or the revelation of Its contents In any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law." "Reproduction of this document in any form by other than naval activities is not authorized exccpt by special approval of the Secretary of the Navy or the Chief of Naval Operations as appropriate."

April 1950

Report C-297

CONFIDENTIAL

1? .

-- ,--T

CONFIDENTIAL TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ......... INTRODUCTION .........

..... .....

............................... ............................

. .. . ...

CHARACTERISTICS OF SERIES 58 ..... DESCRIPTION OF MODELS .......... TEST APPARATUS AND PROCEDURE ......... REDUCTION OF TEST DATA ......... PRESENTATION OF DATA ........... DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ..... CONCLUSIONS .......... PERSONNEL ........ REFERENCES ......... ..... .....

...
..... ... .......

.................... ........................ ..................... ......................

2 8 9. 13 18 27 ... 33 .... 34 34

......................... ..... ........................

............................. ............................ .............................

......... .........

APPENDIX 1 - MEMORANDUM REVIEWING THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON STREAMLINED BODIES OF REVOLUTION PRIOR TO SERIES 58 APPENDIX 2 - TABLES OF OFFSETS FOR SERIES 58 ...... .............

. . 35 47

APPENDIX 3 - TOTAL-RESISTANCE COEFFICIENTS DERIVED FROM TESTS OF MODELS OF SERIES 58 AT DEEP SUBMERGENCE PLOTTED AGAINST

REYNOLDS NUMBERS .....

.....

...

................... ............ ...

73
99
103

APPENDIX 4 - RESIDUAL-RESISTANCE COEFFICIENT CURVES USED TO DETERMINE

THE STRUT CORRECTION COEFFICIENTS ....

APPENDIX

5 - NET RESIDUAL-RESISTANCE COEFFICIENTS FOR DEEP SUBMERGENCE PLOTTED AGAINST FROUDE NUMBER ...............

APPENDIX 6 - TOTAL BARE HULL EFFECTIVE HORSEPOWER VERSUS VOLUME AT VARIOUS EVEN SPEEDS FOR PROTOTYPES OF SERIES 58 OPERATING AT DEEP SUBMERGENCE ....... ................
APPENDIX

109
.. 135

NET RESIDUAL-RESISTANCE COEFFICIENTS FOR SNORKELLING DEPTHS PLOTTED AGAINST FROUDE NUMBER .... ..........

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

iv

NOTATION Symbol L D S _V_ R R0 Ri X Y x y L/D 0p CPF CPA LCB m r ro ri C5 V p v R Rf Rr AR, AR2 EHP R1 Ct Cf Cr Descript ion Overall length Diameter at the maximum section Wetted-surface area Volume Dimensional radias Dimensional nose radius Dimensional tail radius Dimensional abscissa Dimensional ordinate X Nondimensional abscissa, X Nondimensional ordinate, Y D Fineness ratio Prismatic coefficient Forebody prismatic coefficient Afterbody prismatic coefficient Position of the longitudinal center of buoyancy measured from the nose expressed as a ratio to the length. Distance of maximum section from the nose expressed as a ratio to the length Nondimensional radius Nondimensional nose radius Nondimensional tail radius Wetted surface coefficient Speed
Mass density

Dimensions in MassLength-Time System L L L2 L3 L L L L L

LT"1
ML-s

Kinematic viscosity Total resistance Frictional resistance Residual resistance Resistance added due to sand roughness Resistance added due to strut interference effect Effective horsepower Reynolds number based on length of body Total-resistance coefficient Frictional-resistance coefficient Residual-resistance coefficient

L2 T- 1 MLT4LT 2 MLTnLT- 2

mLT-

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

ABSTRACT The results of experiments with a systematic series of 24 mathematically related streamlined bodies of revolution, showing how the resistance of these bodies at deep submergence varies with changes in five selected geometrical parameters, are presented. These geometrical parameters are the fineness ratio, the prismatic coefficient, the nose radius, the tail radius, and the position of the maximum section. The characteristics of the series forms, the techniques used in testing, the procedures used in analyzing the data, the methods of predicting prototype performance, and the means used to shuw relative performance are explained. The results of tests of four models at near-surface or snorkelling conditions are also included. The series forms ard compared on an equal volume basis including the estimated added resistance due to control surfaces necessary for prescribed directional stability characteristics. These comparisons indicate that there is a large variation in submerged resistance among these forms and that there is a definite minimum resistance on each parameter variation except for the nose radius.

INTRODUCTION

The Bureau of Ships requested' the David Taylor Model Basin to conduct a broad investigative program on the resistance of various shapes of underwater bodies, in order to provide basic data for the hull design of highsubmerged-speed submarines. The investigation was intended not only to cover bare-hull performance but also to consider the effect on resistance of those control surfaces that are necessary to meet certain directional-stability requirements. The David Taylor Model Basin had previously made a survey of the literature and existing aeronautical data and incorporated its findings in a memorandum which, because of its original limited circulation, is reproduced in Appendix 1. The conclusion that was reached from this survey was that Systematic data on the resistance of streamlined forms deeply submerged in a fluid, was practically nonexistent. Consequently the Taylor Model Basin formulated a mathematically derived series of bodies of revolution which was designated Series 58. Twenty-four 9-foot models were constructed for the series. These were tested to determine their resistance at a submergence which was deep enough to substantially eliminate free-surface effects.

*All references are listed on page 3h of this report.

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

The primary purpose of the resistance tests was to determine the effect, upon submerged resistance, of the variation of five selected geometrical parameters which can be used to define the shape of streamlined bodies of revolution. The subject matter of this report concerns the establishment of general criteria for designing minimum resistance forms for given service requirements. The characteristics and derivation of the series forms are given; the methods of testing including the towing apparatus, the devices used to correct for strut-interference effects, and the method of stimulating turbu"lence are described in detail; the techniques for the reduction of model data and methods for predicting prototype performance are explained; and suggested considerations for the selection of the minimum resistance form for application to submarine design are given. The results of tests of four models at near-surface or snorkelling conditions are also given to show their influence upon the final selection of the optimum form. CHARACTERISTICS OF SERIES 58 The offsets of the models composing Series 58 are derived, by the method described in Reference 2, from a sixth degree polynomial of the form y2 = a~x + a 2 x 2 + asxS + a 4 x4 + a5 x 5 + a 6 x 6 , where x is the nondimensional abscissa and y is the nondimensional ordinate. The arbitrary constants al, a 2 , etc., for each form are determined when the values for the geometrical parameters are assigned. The geometrical parameters which are varied are, nondimensionally, the overall prismatic coefficient Cp, the position of the maximum section m, the nose radius r0 , the tail radius r , , and the fineness ratio L/A. The nondimensional offsets X/L vs. Y/D are the same for all fineness ratios, once the other four parameters have been fixed. The nose and tail radii are nondimensionalized by the following relationship:

R
r = D& =-D)Ill-

D2
where r is R is L is D is the nondimonsional radius, the dimensional radius, the length, and the diameter.

D
L

It should be noted that the nose-radius and tail-radius parameters as used here do not apply merely .to the extremities of the given forms but actually affect the shape of the whole form. 2 This is shown in Figure 3 where CONFIDENTIAL

3
m~ 0.40 r..0.50

CONFIDENTIAL

LpOO 13a.7.0

OL78

Tall Radius, r,
m*0.40

.0.10

C1. 0.65

L/0 7. 0 0

Nse* Radius, ro

....

... ... ....

... .... ...... ... ....

0.0

ei66~:fft 0.1 .r~cl Toficet Op

.8

82 Q?

~ ~ ~~1 W42
m.0H4. i*050t.Oi

0.j0!0!5

5
0 0 5

y s

Fiu r

Wete
cofiin is t.

-Series.5. -o -u Coficet -1
h aeh .e~h ..h

Thewette-rfc wettedsurfac ara

is define asS2DweeSi a. D i. di.a.eter

0 -

.. ON D..N.I.L .. .

CONFIDENTIAL

it can be seen that substantial changes of prismatic of forebody and prismatic of afterbody occur with the changes in nose and tail radii. A system of serial numbers which describes the nondimensional forms of the series has been used. The serial number for a given form generally consists of ten integers which are read from left to right in gro'.4s of two to denote the parameters in the following order: Position of maximum section, nose radius, tail radius, prismatic coefficient, and fineness ratio. Thus, to illustrate the parameters and position of the decimal points, for a serial

of 40050165-70,
m ro r, O L/D = 0.40 = 0.50 = 0.10 = o.65 = 7.00

When more than two integers are required to describe the parameter they are placed in parentheses. Thus for a tail radius of 0.05, the serial is given

as (005).
The forms of Series 58 are defined by five parameters and, assuming that four variations on each parameter would be required to establish a curve accurately, it would require 45 or 1024 models to give complete coverage. Consequently, Series 58 was abbreviated by first selecting a parent form which would serve as an approximate central point for the variation of each parameter. The parent selected was one having a serial of 40050165-70. Twentytwo models based upon this parent were then constructed. The parameters for these models are shown in Table 1. One of these models, having an L/D = 5.0, was selected as a second parent and two additional models were constructed. The characteristics of these are also shown in Table 1. A complete table of offsets for each series model is given in Appendix 2. Each table includes the nondimensional abscissas and ordinates and dimensional abscissas and ordinates for the construction of a 9-foot model. Other pertinent data-such as the maximum diameter, volume, wetted surface, position of the maximum section, position of the longitudinal center of buoyancy, etc., including the mathematical equation for the forms-are also given. Curves showirZ the variation of wetted-surface coefficient with the five prescribed geometrical parameters are given in Figure 1. Curves showing how the wetted surface varies on a fixed volume basis are shown in Figure 2. It is interesting to note that when the comparisons are made on an equal-volume basis, there is only a small change in wetted surface with prismatic coefficient over the range of values covered. This is true even though there is a substantial change in the wetted-surface coefficients of these CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

TABLE 1
The Geometrical Parameters for Models of Series 58

Model 415LL 4155 4156 4157 4158 4159 416o 4161 4162 4163 4164 4165 4166 4167 4168 4169 4170 4171 4172 4173 4174 4175 4176 14177

ro 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.30 0.70 1.00 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.10 o.io 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.05 0.15 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.10 o.65 o.65 0.65 o.65 o.65 o.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.55 o.60 0.70 0.65 o.65 o.65 0.65 o.65 o.65 o.65 o.65 O.60 0.55 0.65

LrD 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 10.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 5.0 7.0

0.240 0.40 0.40 o.14o 0.40 0.140 0.36 0.44 0.48 0.52 0.40 0.140 0.40 0.140 0.14o 0.140 0.40 0.140 0.140 0.140 0. 40 0.140 0.40 0.34

forms as shown in Figure 1. relationship:

The reason for this can be shown by. the following

os = _S
where C. is the wetted-surface coefficient,
S L is the wetted surface, is the length, and

[21

D is the maximum diameter.

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

m.0.40 0.01
0.0 .04

ro.050

CP -0.

65
_

L/D7.00 I C5

1
.08 .12 Tall Radius, .16 r, .20 .24

1011L~~I.00
.28

m, 0.40_

..... __

11
0.40 0.60 0.60 Nose Radius, r,

.65

L/0D 7.00 1.0

020

1.00

1.20

.0

0.40 5..0 L

-0.50

0.10

1.05

0.54

0.8

0.62

0.66 Prismatic

0.70 0oefficient,

0.74 Cp

0.78

0.P2

3
ra, 0.50
g "0.10

t
0.34 08 0.42

Pii 0.46

Position of Maximumn Section,

0.50

zz
mnol J

Cp ,0.65

fF1.

1 ID T.00iI I

0.54

FIJ00

m ,0.40 . v 0 0.50 r, 0.10

Cp, 0.65

'.35

-. 30

--

1.25

1.20

1.00 4 6 ? fineness Ratio, 9 10 11

-0

Fgurs 2

Wetted-Surface Areas for Prototypes of Series Compared on a Basis of Equal Volume

58

The wetted-surfaoe areas have been calculated for bare-hull. prototypes and are expressed as a ratio to the minimum for each geometrical parameter variation.

CONFIDENTIAL

7
ML=

CONFIDENTIAL [31

where C. is the prismatic coefficient and *V-is the volume. Let the fineness ratio L/D = n. Then

C
or

[4]

L, =

L (4n__1t
(r0)

[5]

Substituting Equation [5] in Equation [2] and transposing

S
= C 7r1/s

n|/a(4V-)2/

[6]

is obtained. This is the general expression for obtaining the wetted surface of all prototypes of Series 58. Now, if n and * are taken to be constant and all the remaining constant terms are collected and denoted by K, then
KCs

S =

57] (Cp)2/3,
0.55 and L/D 7.00,

Substituting numerical values from Figure 1, for Cp

S =

6 x o. 954. 1.036K (0.55)2/a

and for Cp= 0.70 and L/D = 7.00, S= K x 0.8094 (0.70)2"/

.

1.027 K

Thus there is only 0.9 percent difference In wetted-surface area between the OF of 0.55 and the Cp of 0.70, a percentage that agrees with Figure 2. Or to summarize, the wetted-surface coefficient varies approximately as the twothirds power of the prismatic coefficient in the range of values covered by Series 58. The volumetric distribution on the series forms is shown in Figure 3 by curves of prismatic of the forebody, C.F, prismatic of the afterbody, CPA, and position of longitudinal center of buoyancy, LOB, versus each of the prescribed parameters for the series-with the exception of fineness ratio which does not alter these properties. CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

.75

___

.7
-

I I
.-

1t

'

CPA

iPA

*I

+lIi/~,

- ILL ip . - : . . .

q;-lIf, .:_Ii~ . . ; !I i I
I... .,

--

__ _

SIJ /H

:4J .t,

., "
.,'

ii

F -I

;C iE

.,

,,i

JO,, 6

'O

.0

,0

0,0

0.5

1.0

0.0

,,05

.10

.15

. 2,0

Figure 3 -The Variation of Fborebody Pri.snatic Coefficient, Afterbody Prismatic Coefficient, and Lonigitudinal Center of Buoyancy for Series 58

DESCRIPTION OF MODELS

; ,:

The models for the series were constructed in the model shop at the David Taylor Model Basin and were all 9 feet in length. All but two of the models were built of Honduras mahogany. Of the exccepted two, one was made of Alaska yellow cedar and the other of sugar pine. Mahogany was selected as the preferred material for building the models since it was found to be more impervious to water and consequently the models constructed of mahogany maintained their dimensions within a few hundredths of an inch without cracking or checking, even when subjected to long periods of soaking. The procedure for constructing the models was as follows: A block was assembled from glued lifts cut from planks; the block was then turned on a lathe and cut by a rotating cutting head which travelled along a longitudinal template defining the profile meridian of the form; a central cutout was provided in the model to accommodate an internal d.ynamometer and forward and after cutouts were made to aeeommiodat the pads for securing the towing struts; the cutouts were covered by I/8-inch-thick sheet-aluminum plates which were molded to fit the contours of the model.

'

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

The procedure for finishing the models was as follows: The mahogany was first sealed with marine wood sealer followed by paste wood filler and then rubbed with burlap or excelsior to remove the excess filler; after about 6 hours of drying time, the model was sprayed with Dupont 1991 lacquer sealer and then sanded with sandpaper moistened with soapy water until a smooth finish was obtained; a final coating of Dupont Dulux examel, Ra-190, exterior clear, was sprayed on the model and, when dry, was rubbed down with a rubbing compound. A photograph of a typical model is given in Figure 4.

Figure 4

A Typical Model of Series 58

TEST APPARATUS AND PROCEDURE The "TMB Paired Towing Struts" were used to tow the series models in the deep-submergence condition. The assembly of each of the two towing struts consists of an internal supporting strut and an external fairing. The internal supporting strut is pin-connected to the model at one end and clamped to the floating girder of the resistance dynamometer at the other end. The external fairing is placed concentrically about the supporting strut to shield it completely from the flow. The fairing is free at the model end and is fixed to a pair of rails, which are rigidly mounted to the towing carriage, at the upper end. The towing arrangement used for the tests is diagrammatically shown in Figure 5. Two struts were used because a single one of the existing struts did not have the torsional rigidity required to overcome the inherent dynamic instability of the bare-hull models at the test speeds comtemplated. The fairings of the struts were inserted into the model through deck-plate openIngs which had enough clearance to provide for the motion of the resistance dynamometer and for possible side deflection of the internal strut or fairing.

CONFIDENTIAL

i.~

~-,_

--

I.CONFIDENTIAL

10

A resistance increase was expected due to the interference with the flow about the models caused by the presence of the towing struts. Consequently, It was necessary to construct a pair of dummy struts in order to determine the ni~gnitude of this effect. The dumim-strut assem~bly 16 shown in Figure 6.

-Floating

Girder

)0000 00000000 -DO000000 0

internal Suipporting Strut Adjusting Screw Supporting Strut Brackiet_-T~External FxdBa

0000000

00go 00

Windshield removed to show bracket.-irsh Fairing Bracket

External Fairing
0

0J

Direction of Tow

internal Supporting Strut

Figure 5

-Schematic

Diagram of the Arrangement of the Model-Towing Apparatus

CONFIDENTIAL

-Ir

L .

.',

.,v

___r

11

CONFIDENTIAL

SI!

I_ 8uj
.I ..............

ot

Ci I

Im---

._..,

~m....mm

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

12

I
The dummy struts are supported by a frame which is parallel to the towing struts. The struts have the same cross section as the fairings of the towing struts. They project at right angles to the supporting frame and are inserted into the model in a manner similar to the fairings of the towing struts and, like the latter, are not attached to the model. The arrangement of placing the dummy struts at 90 degrees instead of 180 degrees to the towing struts was selected for two reasons: First, because of the imppx-acticability of ing dummy struts coming up to the bottom of the model, and second', because it was considered desirable to reproduce, in another plane, the original asymmetry in flow about the model caused by the towing struts. It was assumed from previous experience that there would be no measurable increase in resistance due to mutual interference in flow between each towing strut and dummy strut. The validity of this assumption is verified by the agreement in the results of tests of 9- and 15-foot geometrically similar streamlined bodies of revolution, which are discussed in a subsequent section of this report. For the purpose of stimulating turbulence, the model was prepared for tests with a 1/2-inch-wide sand strip placed in the form of a circle, around the nose of the model at a distance of 1/20 of the length (of the model) from the nose. The strip was prepared by sprinkling 20- to 30-mesh sand on a thin adhesive coating. The procedure used in the testing was as follows: The smooth bare hull was first towed at a range of steady-state speeds from 1 to 18 knots; the test was then repeated for the model equipped with the sand strip. The model with the sand strip was tested with the duxmmy struts inserted and then with the dummy struts removed but with the dummy-strut supporting frame down (in order to obtain the net effect of the dummy struts alone). The tests with the dummy struts in place extended only up to a speed of approximately 8.5 knots because the system was not stiff enough to maintain clearance between the dummy strut and the edge of the cutout in the model at higher speeds. Strut-interference teats were not conducted for all models since the small change in strut-interference coefficient from model to model permitted accurate interpolation and extrapolation. The apparatus used to tow the models at the near-surface or snorkelling conditions consisted of a single towing strut, having a 4- by 1-inch ogival cross section,which was rigidly attached to the model at one end and to the

I.

I.pport-

CONFIDENTIAL

II

i,

..

. .

13

CONFIDENTIAL

floating girder of the resistance dynamometer at the other end. The strut had no external fairing, so that separate resistance tests of the strut werv necessary to obtain the tare. The procedure of testing was as follows: Each model, prepared with a sand strip, was towed at a range of steady-state speeds from 1 to 18 knots at each of three different depths of submergence. The depths were taken in small increments about what was considered to be a reasonable snorkelling depth based on information from other submarines. The strut was then towed alone over the same speed range at the appropriate depths to obtain the tare resistances. Separate tests of the models to determine the additions in resistance due to sand-roughness and strut-interference effect were not made at the snorkelling conditions. The means used to assess these quantities are explained in the following section. Because of limitations in time, only four models, embodying the variation of prismatic coefficient at a fineness ratio of 7.0, were tested for near-surface resistance. REDUCTION OF TEST DATA The resistance'versus-speed values obtained from the tests of each model were reduced to nondimensional form by the method of Reference 3, as

follows:
The total-resistance coefficient is defined as:

Rt[8

sv

8]

where C is the total-resistance coefficient, t

Rt is the total resistance,

p V is the mass density, and is the speed.

The frictional-resistance coefficient is obtained from the Schoenherr formula

o7

- logCO (Re. Cf)

fg

where C is the frictional-resistance coefficient, f Re Is the Reynolds number, equal t3 'VL Ve is thespe L is the overall length, and is the kinenatic viscosity of the basin water. CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

14.

This is subtracted from the total-resistance coefficient to obtain the residual-resistance coefficient, or

Ut

Cf

=C

Sr= SSV2

Rr

[10o is the residual

where C is the residual-resistance coefficient, and R

resistance. The residual-resistance coefficient values were then plotted against the Froude number,_-, and irregularities due to obvious test-spot discrepancics faired out. The Froude number was selected as the speed parametfr for fairing purposes even for the deep-submergence tests because, although the models for these tests were towed at considerable depth, a small amount of wave-making resistance, which varies with Froude number, remained. As mentioned previously, for the majority of the models four resistance tests at deep submergence were made: A test of the smooth model, a test of the model with the sand strip for stimulating turbulence, a test of the model with the dummy-strut supporting frame alone, and a test of the model with the dummy struts inserted into the model. To illustrate how the data from these four tests are used to obtain the net residual-resistance coefficient, the data from the tests of Model 4165 are reproduced in Figure 7.

Iftrt-Ittrfrn

t bummy truts Inetti

.0 .20 .~~
.1o .20 .$o

.40
.4 0 .5 Froude

W~th~Support~ing Frq(AqroI Oflllt030 10J~

0 Number, V/ .0o -g. .$0 .90

nd 6 irt

It
._ _ ,

nd-tJough0On Int0. Ce tfg

-gf'

l --

l___- l

.i

JO

JO

.30

40

J.O

A,

i .0

*0

, .90

.0

II

.2l

1.

1.4

LO

.6l

L7

Frouda Number, V/g1-

Figure

Sample flesidual-Resistancc-Coefficient
T1he data w~ro derlved from taests with Mudel 4165.

Curves

CONFIDENTIAL

15

CONFIDENTIAL

Examining first the results of the smooth-hull tests, It can be seen that below a s-roude number of 0.7-corresponding to a Reynolds number of about 1 .04 x 107 -the Cr curve drops sharply and attains uc:.gative values below a Froude number 0.4. Since the Cr values were obtained by subtracting turbulent Cf values from the Ct data, the drop in the Cr curve indicates the pres-ence of laminar flow over part of the body. This is verified by the Cr curve for the body wtion the sand strip is used to stimulate turbulence. Here the Cr curve is very nearly horizontal from low to high Froude numbers, except for the hump, which is known to be due to wave-making resistance. The Cr curve for the body with the sand strip is higher, however, even at high Froude numbers. This is considered to be due to the added resistance, caused by the sand itself. It is noted that above a Froude number of 0.7 these two Cr curves are parallel. Thus, the difference between the Cr s in this area can be taken as representative of the correction needed to compensate for the added resistanco of the sand. The curve for the smooth body can then be amended as shown by the broken line. The effect of the sand beyond that caused by turbulence stimulwtion will hereinafter be referred to as the "sand-roughness , where4R, is the resistance added by the sand. coefficient," -/2 If, now, the Cr curve for the model towed with the dummy-strut supporting frame alone in place and the curve for the model including the dummy struts are taken as a pair, it can be seen that these curves are also parallel. Consequently if the difference between these curves can be denoted as the "strut-interference coefficient," p12 SV 2 , then the smooth-bare-hull Cr curve can be further corrected to obtain the net Cr curve which is shown in Figure 7. To summarize, net Cr = gross Cr minus sand-roughness coefficient minus strutinterference coefficient. To illustrate the velidity of the aforementioned procedure, the results of tests of two different-sized, geometrically similar streamlined bodies of revolution are shown as resistance coefficients in Figure 8. The test results are for a 9- and a 15-foot model of a TMB-EPH form of a fineness ratio of 5. As can be readily seen, after the respective sand-roughness and strut-interference coefficients are deducted from the Ct curves derived from the tests of each model, the net Ct curves, and consequently the net Cr curves, in the area outside of the wave-making hump are identical. The fact that the sand-roughness and strut-interference coefficients are quite different in magnitude for the two different sized models, (0.10 x 10-3 and 0.30 x i0-3) for the 9-foot model and (0.05 x 10-3 nnd 0.05 x I0-3) for the 15-foot model, and yet yield the same net Crts, is an indication of the accuracy of

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

16

00

'Id It haR 0

a0

a
0 zA

e4

z
ha a

1LLLL Ia k

ha r. co h.0 ej
-

0 ha ha ha U
ha

4)

a h

ha

ha.U ha

* = hai ah d

a. U =

a,00 CdE.

* ha

~U~ o

*.Q)~

CONFIENTIA

17

CONFIDENTIAL

the test procedure and analysis technique. Thus the results of the tests of the 9-foot models can be used quantitatively with the same confidence as those from tests of large models. The method used to extrapolate the model data to obtain the effective horsepowers for geometrically similar prototypes for deep submergence is essentially the same as the method of Reference 3. The only difference is that Cr is considered to be constant and independent of Froude number. The assumption of the constancy of Cr for the deep submergence condition is based on the following reasoning: As will be shown subsequently, the results of tests of all models of Series 58 at deep submergence have indicated that the Crts as defined by Equation [10] are sensibly constant over a range of Reynolds numbers from 2 x 106 to 2 x 107 , with the exception of the small wavemaking hump. It is reasonable to assume, therefore, that if the Cr does not change over such a wide model range, where its dependency with Reynolds number should be most pronounced, there will be no further change in the extrapolation to full-scale Reynolds numbers, which are only removed from the highest model Reynolds number by a factor of the order of 10. Thus, the total effective horsepower is:

EHPt = (Cr + Cf + ACf) Pv

r f f

(1.689)8 55U-

where Cr is the net residual-resistance coefficient corrected for the sandroughness coefficient and the strut-interference coefficient, Cf is obtained from the Schoenherr formula using the appropriate Reynolds number based on the full-scale speed and length and on a kinematic viscosity corresponding to a standard sea water of 3 percent salinity at a temperature of 59 F., ACf is the roughness-allowance coefficient and is taken, for the purpose of this analysis, equal to 0.400 x 10O3 as recommended by the American Towing Tank Conference,* p is the mass density of sea water at 59 F., S is the full-scale wetted-surface area, V is the speed which, when knots are used, requires the conversion

factor of 1.689, and

550 is the conversion factor of foot-lb per second to horsepower.
*Recent stanidardization irials have IrAicated that a roughness-allowance coefficient of 0.4 x 10-3

is somewhat low even for clean-bottom vessels treated with zinc chromate paint.

Roughness-allowance

coefficients for vessels treated vinh fmtifouling paints of hot or cold plastic are even higher. There are very little existing data on the roughnese of 4ubmarine hulls. It is recommended, therefore, that when sufficient roughness data are available, they be applied to adjust the EHP values in this report,

ifmore accurate quok4attv results are desired. In general, the merit relationships will not be materially altered by a chn.nge of roughness-allownncc coefficient.

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL The method used to reduce the data from the model snorkelling tests was as follows: The strut taro resistances were faired against model speed and then cross-faired against depth. The appropriate faired tares were then subtracted from the test data values of gross resistance versus speed. The tares were small, amounting to only approximately 8 percent of the total measured resistance. The resultant data were used to compute C's using Equations [8) and [9) and these CrIs were then plotted agnsit Fr oude number and faired. An examination of the Cr curves for each model revealed that, below a Froude number of approximately 0.25, the curves for all tested depths converged at a single constant value. The difference between this value and the net Cr for deep submergence was considered to be equal to the sum of the sand-roughness coefficient and the strut-interference coefficient for the snorkelling tests of the given model. This assumed coefficient was then deducted from the faired Cr curve values to obtain the net Cr-versus-Froude number curves. The EHP's were then computed by the method of Reference 3 using the net Cr ,. PRESENTATION OF DATA The data derived from the deep-submergence resistance tests of Series 58 are presented in several different forms to facilitate immediate application for various purposes. First, to permit an independent evaluation, the data are presented in Appendix 3 as total-resistance coefficients plotted against Reynolds number. Test spots are shown for the model tested, with and without sand strips. Values for the sand-roughness coefficient and the strut-interference coefficient are given on each set of curves. Data for the strut-interference coefficients ars given in Appendix 4 in the form of Cr versus Froude number. Secondly, the corrected, or net, Cr's plotted against Froude number are shown as curves in Appendix 5. These curves demonstrate that Cr is constant and independent of Reynolds' number at deep submergence, show the extent of the wave-making resistance at the depth tested, and permit calculations of the total-resistance coefficient, the effective horsepower, or various other comparative resistance coefficients. The constant values for the Cr taken from each of these curves are restated in Table 2. To provide a means for readily obtaining the effective horsepower for various prototypes of each of the series forms, curves of effective horsepower versus Immersed volume (or displacement in salt-water tons) are given for various even speeds in Appendix 6. The EHP's in these curves have been calculated for bare hull, to which a roughness-allowance coefficient of 0.4 x 10-s has been added. Standard conditions of salt water at 59 F. were used.

CONFIDENTIAL

19 TABLE 2

CONFIDENTIAL

Net Residual-Resistance Coefficients for Series 58 Forms at Deep Submergence Model 4154 4155 4156 4157 Net Coefficient 0.58 x 10-" 0.36 0.22 0.13 4162 4163 t4164 4165 Model Net Coefficient 0.17 x 10-9 0.19 0.37 0.07 4170 4171 4172 4173 4175 Moel Net Coefficient 0.18 x 10-8 0.13 0.13 0.13

4158
4159

0.09 0.12

4166
4167

o.28
o.16

4174 4176

0.10

0.075

0.32

416o

4168

0.14

0.141

4161

0.15

4169

0.14

4177

o.16

Curves relating the lengths to the volumes of the prototypes are also given in Appendix 6. The variation in EHP due to the change in geometrical parameters is shown by the use of "merit curves" in Figures 9 to 14. The EHPIs used to construct these curves were calculated for prototypes having equal volumes, namely 60,00o cubic feet (corresponding to 1715 tons) of displaced salt water. In each curve, submerged EHP's for a given form are expressed as ratios to the minimum bare-hull EHP of the group of forms being compared. The ratios are average values for a speed range of 10 to 30 knots and apply to any speed in this range to within 1/2 of I percent, changing only because of the small variation of frictional resistance coefficient with Reynolds numbers. They also apply Just as closely to any fixed volume comparison between volumes of 20,000 to 100,000 cubic feet. The ratios are, in each case, plotted against the geometrical parameter that is varied. Thus the advantage that can be gained, In terms of percent, by the variation of these parameters can be readily seen. The circle on each curve denotes the parent form. The broken lines on the merit curves indicate the EHP-Including a calculated added EHP due to the addition of horizontal and vertical control surfaces. The increase in EHP due to the addition of the control surfaces was estimated by the following empirical relationship:

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

20

1.25
OP

~.O7
0

71-h q:#U~"'~

6 5

1.0

Nizz

-l4t'
T: J

Finenes Rato,

AD onEH

The EHP'swere LITedfo calc 6,0-cui-otpooyeoeaigi atwtro 9F sn rouhnssalownc 04 ceficen o l~ nda Cfo te ee2~ sbmrgd onitonwhchha

1.00

4D

rX~~~~100

607 FRINNSSUATIO COFFCINT ,

.0SOI

Figure 10

of Variation Lniuia M - erit Curves Showing the Effect ofth PrimaicCoFfiienesRtio, for anLAEf .HoPR

surace. he irle enoesthSeaen

notermg.e9

CONFIDE0.40

21

CONFIDENTIAL

0.4

1.200

fL i'

L/D

5-

.54::- .56-

.2

-I+60 6

.5'06.8

.40

.6

.6

.66

PRISMATIC7 COEFFII0.65C

Fiur

L1MrtCre PrsaiI-fiinC

hwn
Se noe

h
Fgre9

feto
fra /

aito
f50o

fLniuia
H

00

.20~

.40 NONDIMNSIONA

~
NOE

. 06 ADU

Figre1

M0rit CuvsSoig theEfc 7t Nos Raius r. 0 0 onEM

pi~~ill Se Figure4 9ll I!!e,

fVrain
T '

LCONFSD77PiAT

CONFIDENTIAL

22

v 11

*.0

LL/C . O-

wr .05]5

/-.0

17

1.1007

O 02

.4

.06

.08

.10

J12

.14

J16

is5

.20

Figure 13

-Merit

r, Curves Showing the Effect of Variation of Tail Radius, rl, on EHP

See note, Figure 9.

NONOIMENSIONAL TAIL RADIUS,

1.20C 0,iaO50O Cpa 0.65

a 0~s.10
1.15
--.--

- L/Da 7.00
_ _

-._

, _ _ _

1.10

1.0

0.34

0.36

0.38

040 0.42 044 0.46 048. POSITION OF MAXIMUM SECTION, m

0.50

0.52

Figure 114 Merit~ Curves Showing the Effect of Variation of Position or Maximum Section, m, on ER?
See note, Figure 9.

nr EHP 1

+ 2 . .] 3

[2] fi

where EHP, is the effective horsepower for the bare-hull plus control surfaces, EHP1 is the bare-hull effective horsepower, Sis the wetted-surface area of the control surfaces, S is the wetted-area of the bare-hull, and the factor 2.3 was obtained by averaging the results of tests to determine the separate resistances of various types of control surfaces when Installed on different classes of submarines.
CONFIDENTIAL

23

CONFIDENTIAL

This empirical factor (2.3) combines the effects of several variables, such as the interference effect between the control surface and the hull, the use of a Reynolds number based on the length of the hull instead of a Reynolds number based on the length of the control surface, and differences in boundary-layer thicknesses or wakes in the neighborhood of the control surface. The resultant effect is a first approximation of the augmentation to the total resistance of the hull due to the addition of the control surfaces. This approximation, although not accurate enough for a quantitative appraisal, serves the purpose of showing the effects of the addition of control surface areas on the merit relationships of Series 58. Although this factor is high compared to control surfaces designed solely on resistance considerations, it is considered fairly representative of present practical control-surface design. The required control-surface areas for the various forms are shown in Figure 15. The quantities given represent the total areas (both sides) of both horizontal and vertical control surfaces. These areas were predicted from the derivatives obtained from static-stability tests of Series 58 by the method of Roference 4. The basic assumptions used in the derivation were: A directional stability index (dimensional = -0.02 reciprocal second), a constant volume of 60,ooo cubic feet, radii of gyration equal to those of prolate spheroids of the same length, and control surfaces having a span equal to the maximum diameter of the form under consideration. The data derived from the resistance tests of models of Series 58 at the snorkelling conditions are presented in several ways. The net C'S plotted against Froude number are shown in Appendix 7, as curves for each of the tested depth-to-diameter ratios. These Cr's permit the calculation of EHP's for any geometrically similar prototype within the given range of depthto-diameter ratios. For comparison purposes, the EHP's have been calculated for 6 0,000-cubic-foot prototypes operating in salt water of 59 F. at an assumed depth of submergence of 20 feet to the top of the hull at the maximum diameter. These EHP's are shown plotted against speed for each prismatic coefficient in Figure 16 and as cross curves against prismatic coefficient for various even speeds in Figure 17. The EHP's of Figures 16 and 17 are expressed, in Table 3, as ratios to the minimum BHP for deep submergence for each given speed. The purpose of this is to show the magnitude of the snorkelling EHP in percentages which are referred to the same basis as used in Figure C FN.

I[

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL
m 0.40 V'0.50

24
Up. .5LOK 700

Tail Radius.

r,

nn 0.40

*0.10

___

C-s0.65

L/~OT.00 0

]A II ;1. 777
Tim'
0.0 02 04

7j

--

1
-. 4,5000

400

as Nose Radius, ta

0.8

10

L2

nn m040

r'

.0r,20.10O goo

a
2

L/lJ'

"r-700

07.00 D

.:

A4.0.2.6.70
PdgvMfllCoefficimnt, Or

.74

.400 .79

f'

.0r

0.10

0,* 0.65

LD7

Position of Maximumn Section, M

____040 _

.0.5

rlI.la1
-~

cp0.65

~0goo1

----

,--1

t f,[.L]j4E

L4:

j1 p

Rato,

IT70

25

CONFIDENTIAL

--

-.-- 000

II-

F-17100

-1`7
f I

r~__T0

Coe7iiets

3o 60004uicFo

PrtoyesoSr0s5

the0

imtruig

ogns-loacecefceto t

l~adfrsad

5000

ard~~~~~~/at0ae0 f 7odtin

CONIDETIA

CONFIDENTIAL

26

m '1

0.40 0..

20-

Tzz~o

--

P+sai

ofiiC

Figre1 otl BreHul EP erss rimatc oe~i20n a 7Various1 Eve 0pes6r6,00CbcFotPooeo Seris 58Opertingat Sorkein50ept
See rctekigue Th

CONFIEN~iA

27

CONFIDENTIAL

TABLE 3 Ratios of the EHP's at Snorkelling Condition to the Minimum EHP at Deep Submergence for the Series 58 Variation of Prismatic Coefficient at an L/D = 7.0
The EHP's have been calculated for 60,000-cubic-foot prototypes operating in salt water of 59 F. at an assumed depth of submergenca of 20 feet to the top of the hull at the maximum diameter.

KHP/EHPmin

Speed in knots

Cp = 0.55

Cp = o.6o

Cp = o.65

Cp = 0.70

12
14 16
18

1.179
1.325

1.074
1.190
2.415

1.o6o
1.129 1.319 1.490
2.278

1.149
1.246 1.305
2.195

1.886
2.852

20 22

3.483 3.657

3.067 3.333

3.177

3.120

3.521

3.457

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS The range of the geometrical parameters selected for Series 58 is comparatively narrow; the forms chosen are principally those which might reasonably be used for the shape of external hulls for high-submerged-speed submarines. However, these forms may be applied to airships, high-speed torpedoes, airplane fuselages, sound domes, and numerous types of faired housings. Extension of the series to include the more radical shapes required for other applications has been deferred because of the limitation in time imposed on the first phases of the project. restricted in scope, it In spite of the fact that the series is is believed that Figures 9 to 14 will enable the se-

lection of forms very near to the minimnum EHP, within practical design limitations. It will be noted that, although all of the forms of Series 58 may be considered as being within the category of well streamlined shapes, substantial improvement in resistance can be made by the proper selection of geometrical parameters even for such shapes. Other things being equal, bodies of revolution having features such as parallel middle body or very blunt after bodies can be expected to have higher resistances than the bodies contained in Series 58. The variations of the EHP with the geometrical parameters which are shown in Figures 9 to 14 apply in the strictest sense only to the particular parent that is being varied. It is reasonable to assume, however, that the resistances of other parent forms which are not too dissimilar will vary with change of parameter in very nearly the same manner. Consequently, although CONFIDENTIAL

I.

CONFIDENTIAL

28

the subsequent discussion will strictly pertain only to the forms encompassed by the series, it will apply to other similar forms. The effects of the variation of each geometrical parameter on the EHP for deep submergence are separately discussed in the following paragraphs. The comparisons have been made on the basis of equal volume on the assumption that this quantity is of major importance in the design of submarines. The data in the appendices will, however, enable comparisons to be made-based on length, maximum section, or any other geometrical criterion which is suitable to a particular problem. The effect of the variation of fineness ratio for constant volume is shown in Figure 9. It can be seen that the minimum bare-hull EHP occurs at an L/D of approximately 6.5. A saving of about 7.5 percent is effected by changing from an L/D of 10, which corresponds approximately to that of a conventional submarine design, to an L/D of 6.5. Figure 2 shows that for a constant volume of 60,00o cubic feet there is approximately a 32 percent reduction in bare-hull wetted-surface area in going from an L/D of 10 to one of 4.0. Since the wetted-surface area is indicative of the amount of frictional EHP,. it is apparent that, below an L/D of 6.5, the rate of increase in residual EHP is greater than the decrease of the frictional EHP. This relationship is further demonstrated by Figure 18, in which the total, frictional, and residual horsepowers for a speed of 30 knots have been plotted for 60,000-cubic-foot prototypes of the various L/Dls. The frictional EHPts increase almost linearly at a pronounced rate, whereas the residual EHP's tend to level off ab.ove an L/D of 8.0. The comparatively sharp increase in residual EHP* at the lower L/DIs is probably caused by a thickened boundary layer due to the relatively greater positive pressure gradients over the afterbody of the blunter forms. The thicker boundary layers would result in a larger pressure defect over the tail and consequently an increased pressure drag. The effect of the addition of necessary control-surface area upon the location of the optimum L/D is small, only shifting it to approximately 7.0. The variation of the prismatic coefficient at an LID of 7,0 causes the most pronounced change in EHP of any of the parameters covered by the sories. It can be seen from Figure 10 that the minimum-bare-hull ERP occurs at a C. of approximately 0.61. The EHP at this point is approximately 15 percent lower than that of a 0p of 0.55, and 10 percent lower than that of a p of 0.70. The changes are almost entirely changes in residual EHP, since the barehull wetted areas for prototypes of equal volumes are almost equal. The
*The explanations offered in this report to account for the relative malnitudes or the reuidual. Y2PB for the various forms are based on a few preliminary observational experiments conducted in the circu. .ating water channel of the Taylor Model Basin. More precise determination of the causes of form resistance on streamlined bodies will form the subject of future research.

CONFIDENTIAL

29

CONFIDENTIAL

TV-

J_ IT.

F+]

i--i3o

rL-.S

LA

1 1000

of4 Seiet5
Th vleeae oraspe o 5 allowance cof iceto _ . xi. are1 dte _or and1

nos Te oalad ritonlEH~eicldAarognes 0 ThreiulHPshvbnomtd frosnt ' hc W itegec 4r00rc0dfrsn-ouheeadetu-neeeeerc

reaiel agersdulEP nte of05 i rbal aue y+ ai change f slopeof the ftebd hc rdcsavrepesr rdet n consq~~ntlya tickeed ounary aye. Th aditin of cotrolsurace piu ~ noae i l y a t r t e po i i n oFh does

44r 4HI+1

3000

CONFIDENTIAL

30

The variation of EHP with Cp at an L/D of 5.0, shown in Figure 11, differs somewhat from that at an L/b of 7.0. Although the minimum occurs at nearly the same value, C. = 0.60, the bare-hull EHP at a Cp of 0.55 is only 4 percent higher than the minimum. The different character of this curve is probably due to the fact that even at the optimum Cp for an L/D of 5.0, a substantial amount of form resistance exists. Consequently, since the boundary layer at the tail is already relatively thick, it is reasonable to expect that the thickness of the boundary layer would not be as sensitive to changes of form as is the case for an L/n of 7.0. The addition of control surfaces does not materially alter the position of the optimum Cp. The effect of the variation of the nose radius is very small over the range of values tested and consequently the choice of this parameter is not critical. The nose radius of 0.5, used on the parent, appears to be most satisfactory and it does not seem to be advisable to use a nose radius greater than 0.8. The change of nose radius produces a substantial change in forebody and afterbody prismatic coefficient and in the position of the LOB as shown in Figure 3. The latter parameters could be substituted in place of the scale for nose radius in Figure 12 or used interchangeably, to show that these parameters have little effect on resistance over the range tested. The fact that the LOB can be moved quite considerably without much effect upon resistance gives the designer considerable latitude In making his choice of form. The additional resistance computed for tail surfaces does not alter the relative effects of the nose radius. The variation of the tail radius over the range given in Figure 13 does not result in any significant changes of resistance. The tail radius of 0.2 appears to be most satisfactory for the parent, having a 0 of 0.65, because it results in a more gradual afterbody taper. This probably would not be true at lower Cps. The addition of control surface areas does not alter the relative comparison of Figure 13. The position of the maximum section, as shown in Figure 14, does not appear to be critical over the range covered by the series. For the parent used, the optimum position of the maximum section appears to be approximately 0.36. The change in bare-hull EHP is only 3 percent from an m of 0.36 to an m of 0.52, The addition of control surfaces does not mterially alter the optimum position of the maximum section, At snorkelling depths, the effect of the variation of geometrioal parameters on EHP is more pronounced, since the effect of wave-mAking resistance due to surface proximity is also included. As seen in Figure 17 and in

Table 3, the choice of the optimum Cp for enorkelling depends upon the speed that is contemplated. At speeds below 12 knots, the Cp for minimum EHP
CONFIDENTIAL

31

CONFIDENTIAL

approaches the optimum Cp for deep submergence and consequently the choice of Cp for both conditions would be the same. At speeds of 14 to 17 knots, a CP of approximately 0.65 would be more desirable for snorkelling, and if these speeds were contemplated, the relative advantage of using the best Cp for deep Ssubmergence or that for snorkelling would have to be considered in the design of the hull form. It is assumed that snorkelling speeds above 17 knots are impractical at the present time. It is nevertheless of interest to note the effect of Cp at higher speeds, since the optimum Cp for deep submergence is once more approached. It should be noted, from Table 3, that at a speed of 22 knots the bare hull EHP is of the order of 3 1/2 times the EHP at deep submergence. The selection of the minimum resistance form must be done advisedly, even within the scope of the series. Since the variation of geometrical parameters has in each case been made from a common parent, the effects of each parameter are not necessarily additive. For example, the nose or tail radius most suitable for the parent form is not necessarily right for the body of optimum Cp. Furthermore, the optimum form may not be unique in that several combinations of the five parameters used in the series may result in equally good resistance forms. Based on the preceding factors, considering also the effect of the addition of control surface's, and assuming a design snorkelling speed below 12 knots, one possible optimum resistance form is one having an L/D of 7.0, a CP of 0.61, an ro of 0.5, an r1 of 0.1 and an m of 0.36. The r. of 0.1 was selected, instead of the 0.2 indicated by the series results, because the latter value is not compatible with the other parameter changes. Since there are only small changes involved in going from a Cp of 0.61 to a C. of 0.60 and from an m of 0.36 to an m of 0.40, Model 41 65 with a serial of 400 501 60-70 has a form that has a resistance of only approximately 1 percent higher than the selected minimum resistance form. A comparison of the selected minimum resistance form from Series 58 with other existing streamlined bodies of revolution on the basis of equal volume reveals the following: The optimum form has approximately a 3 percent lower bare-hull EHP than the British Ri01 with an L/D = 5 (TMB Model 4184), and approximately a 6 percent lower bare-hull EHP than the TMB-EPH form with an L/D = 5 (TMB Model 414 9 ). It is especially interesting to note that if the merit curves of Series 58 are entered with the geometrical parameters of the R101 and EPH forms mentioned in the foregoing, the EHP difference is identical to that obtained from the actual tests of these two models, i.e., 3 percent. Furthermore, if the R101 form is compared with the Series 58 form having the same geometrical parameters, the resistances are very nearly equal. CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

32

The selected optimum form from Series 58 is compared on an equalvolume basis to a conventional type of submarine in Figure 1(). It can be seen that the conventional form has approximately 22 percent greater bare-hull EHP than the optimum form.

~ ~

4000

from seie o thatof aes 58 ConvMoenial 3ye9f9ubarn

The ~P theoptimumform ws or 2ompte.fo alcti Soumeob4,cbcfe qa ofth cnvntonl yp. hevlus refo depsumegec i sltvaerof59F.usn a oeffcien of .44000~ roaghnea-alovace ota

COPJDEHIA

33

CONFIDENTIAL

It should be emphasized that the optimum form suggested herein is based solely on the resistance performance, which includes the effects of the control surface area required for certain directional stability specifications. The effects of hull shape on propulsive performance will undoubtedly play an important part in the final selection of the optimum form. It is conceivable that the use of a form of lower fineness ratio or fuller afterbody than indicated for' minimum resistance may improve the wake and thrust deduction so that a higher hull efficiency is obtained, which will result in a lower shaft horsepower than that obtained with the minimum resistance form. Furthermore, practical considerations such as machinery layout, military characteristics, etc. will also enter into the determination of the final form. Programs to study the effect of variations in hull form on propulsive characteristics are being plat,ned as an extension of the work with Series 58 and will form the subject of future reports. CONCLUSIONS The results of the experiments with Series 58 show that the submerged resistance of streamlined bodies of revolution, whose section area curves may be represented by sixth degree polynomials, will vary with changes in the geometrical parameters which are used to define these bodies. The

EHP of equal-volume prototypes of Series 58, equipped with horizontal and vertical control surfaces, changes within the range of geometrical parameters covered by the series as follows: 1. Fineness ratio-The maximum change is approximately 12 percent and there is a minimum EHP at an L/D of 7.0. 2. Prismatic coefficient, L/D = 7.0-The maximum change is approximately 15 percent and there is a minimum EHP at a Cp of o.61. 3. Prismatic coefficient, L/D = 5.0-The maximum change is approximately 4 percent and there is a minimum EHP at a Cp of 0.60.
Pi

4. Nose radius-The maximum change is approximately 2 percent and there is a minimum E11P at an ro of 0.5. 5. Tail radius-The maximum change is approximately I percent and there is no definite minimum EHP indicated. 6. Position of maximum section-The maximum change is approximately 5 percent and there is a minimum EHP at an m of 0.36. A minimum resistance form based on the preceding relationships is one having an L/D of 7.0, a C of 0.61, an ro of 0.5, an r of 0.1, and an . 1 of 0.36.
CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIALL

34
PERSONNEL

The present series was selected Jointly by L. Landweber and the author. The remaining work was carried out by the personnel of the Submarine The experimenand Torpedo Powering Section of the David Taylor Model Basin.

tation was conducted by F.S. Cauldwell, C.R. Olson, J. Posner, and W. Kopko, The data were prepared and reduced by J:L. Beverassisted by W. Gotthardt. idge assisted by A.D. Williams and T.M. Mahoney. REFERENCES 1. 2. 719 (in BuShips CONF ltr C-SS/S-2(420) of 8 July 1949 to TMB. "The Mathematical Formulation of

Landweber, L. and Gcrtler, M., preparation).

Bodies of Revolution with Prescribed Geometrical Characteristics," TMB Report

3. Gertler, Morton, "The Prediction of the Effective Horsepower of Ships by Methods in Use at the David Taylor Model Basin," TMB Report 576, December 1947. 4. Landweber, L. and Johnson, J.L., "A Method of Estimating the Dynamic (in preparation).

Stability of a Body of Revolution with Tail Surfaces from Measurements of Bare Hull Static Characteristics," TMB CONF Report

CONFIDENTIAL

35

CONFIDENTIAL

APPENDIX 1 MEMORANDUM REVIEWING THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON STREAMLINED BODIES OF REVOLUTION PRIOR TO SERIES 58

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL
IN REPLY ADDRESS:
DIRECTOR, DAVID TAYLOR MODEL BASIN, USN.

36 PUACU NAVY DEPARTMENT DAVID TAYLOR MODEL BASIN

WASHINOTON 7, D.C.

"REFER TO

FILE:

C-SS/Sl-2(5)
C-A9-1 7

(524:MG: or) CONFIDENTIAL

3 May 1948

MEMORANDUM To: SubJ: Refs: Officer-in-Charge of Hydromechanics Department Research TMB SRD 542/46 - Hydrodynamics of High-Submerged-Speed Submarines Resistance of Streamline Forms. (a) (b)
-

TM7 Conference of 25 Mar 46 attended by Dr. Kennard, Mr. Landweber, Mr. Kirstein, Mr. Gertler, and Mr. Abkowitz of TMB. BuShips Conference of 30 Apr 46 attended by Captain Weaver, Comdr. Tilburne, and Mr. Neidermair of BuShips and Mr. Kirstein, Mr. Gertler and Mr. Abkowitz

of TMB.
(c)

(d) Encl:

C-A9-17 of 3 Aug 46. "Modern Developments in Fluid Dynamics," by S. Goldstein, Volume I1,Chapter XI, Section 2 (1939). TMB CONF Itr C-SS/81-2(5),

(A) Bibliography of the Resistance of Streamline Bodies of Revolution, dated

31 Jan 47.
1. The purpose of this memorandum is to review the steps taken by the David Taylor Model Basin in the basic research phases of the Program f'or Investigation of Hydrodynamics of High-Submerged-Speed Submarines, designated as Project SIM 542/46. In addition, general remarks concerning the state of available experimental data on streamline bodies, of revolution are made and systematic series models are proposed for testing in order to further this knowledge. The discussion which follows is concerned only with the phase of the program which deals with factors affecting the resistance of these forms. Stability, controllability, and propulsion are not considered herein. 2. At the inception of the High-Submerged-Speed Submarine Program, a conference, Reference (a)was held, to determine the course of action to be taken. It was decided, at this time, that data obtained from wind-tunnel experiments on airship forms might be directly applicablo to the ideal submarine form for exclusively submerged operation. It. was suggested, therefore, that a complete bibliographical search on this subject matter be made before an experimental program of basin tests was planned. 3. Pursuant thereto, a detailed search of all available sources was made and the bibliography oontaiiad in Enclosure (A) was assembled. The bibliography has been divided into two categories; one of which is experimental and deals with the results of tests on

CONFIDENTIAL

./

.o.. '.

L I

1"p

37

CONFIDENTIAL

streamline bodies of revolution in wind tunnels, model basins, and on full-scale trials to obtain resistance and related data, and the second which contains papers by various authorities on hydrodynamics giving a theoretical treatment of the same subject matter. 4. A study made to determine the value of these experimernal data revealed that in

general one or more of the following conditions were present which rendered them unreliable as bases for the proposed program: Rt
a. The values of total resistance coefficient (Ct =
'

where Rt is the

total resistance, p is the mass density. S is the wetted surface area, and V is the

speed at any given Reynolds number i , where V is the speed, L is the overall length and v is the kinematic viscosity)for the same model tested in different wind' tunnels
varied over a wide range. This was due to the various degrees of turbulehee in these

tunnels. b. The curves of total resistance coefficient versus Reynolds number for the same
model in the same wind tunnel varied greatly when different means were used to artifi-

cially occurs taine stream

stimulate turbulence. The curves did not converge at a given value as normally when the drag experiments are conducted in water. The drag coefficients obfrom tests in an undisturbed air stream and those obtained from tests in an air with turbulence induced by wire grids placed at different positions relative to

the model differed as much as 200 percent.

a. Most of the available wind tumnel data were obtained at low Reynolds numbers because of the small size of the model used and the low air speed. As a result, most of these data were obtained under conditions of either laminar or transitional flow. d. The few wind tunnel tests made at high enough Reynolds numbers to ensure turbulence without the use of artificial stimulation produced too few experimental observations to discern a trend in the data. e. As far as can be letermined, there have been no tests of systematic series of streamline bodies of revolution conducted in the wind tunnels. The majority of the tests were made either on specific airship designs or isolated cases of streamlined bodies of revolution. Very little or no attempt was made to relate the effect of variables of size and shape to resistance. f. The full-scale data available were obtained from deceleration tests and the approximations relied upon make these data unreliable for any basic study.
g. The model basin test results which are available are inadequate because of the use of small models, low towing speeds, and failure to take accurate temperature

readings. As a result, most of these data were obtained under tran~.tional flow conditions. The following excerpts from Reference (d) confirm some of the above mentioned statements: "Before that date (1929) much experimental work had been conducted on streamline bodies, but (for lack of facilities as well as knowledge) the Reynolds numbers were as a rule so low that the results are of little practical value.

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

38

"In most of the fairly numerous experiments made to determine the effect of the variation of fineness ratio, the Reynolds number has been of the order of 105 or 106 so that the boundary layer has in all probability been partly laminar and partly turbulent. "Other experiments have been unsatisfactory because the fineness ratio has been altered by the insertion of different lengths of cylindrical body between the nose and tail. It is not clear what purpose such tests are expected to serve, since, given a wellshaped nose and tail and Junction between them, drical portion must increase the drag." 5. it seems that the introduction of a cylin-

The inadequacies of the existing data led the Taylor Model Basin to suggest to the Bureau of Ships in Reference (b) that systematic experiments of streamlined bodies of revolution be conductied. It was agreed in this conference that, although these forms might not be practical for submarine hulls, the information gained from tests of the bodies would provide valuable guides for submarine huUl design and add much to the basic knowledge of the subject. As the outcome of this conference, provision for experiments on these forms were incorporated in paragraph 4a of Reference (c) as part of the general research program for the hydrodynamics of high-submerged-speed submarines. The Taylor Model Basin has conducted submerged resistance tests on the bare hulls of several 20-foot submarine models. These models were towed at high enough speeds to ensure It was noted that the value of residual resistance coefficient, Cr-/ reliable data. where R is che residual resistance, was approximately the same for each model and equal 6.

1 Vr S

to 0,0002. This suggests that, in streamline bodies having a length-diameter ratio of from 10 to 12, the prime factor which affects the resistance is the wetted surface area. It

should be mentioned, however,, that the volumes of these models were not the same. 7. The variables which are likely to affect the resistance of streamline bodies of revo. J lution to the greatest extent expressed in non-dimensional form are: h LL
where L is the overall length of the body,

LL

, and and

h fs D is S is -Yiis

the the the the

distance of the section of maximum d'iameter from the nose, diameter of the maximum section, wetted surface area, and volume.

A systematic study of the effects of each of these variables can be made by a series of models which would vary one of the variables at a time while the others remain constant. ince the differences of wetted surface area would be accounted for in the non-dimensional coefficient, C t p12Rt V12" only the three remaining variables need be considered. Thus, 1 S
if three models were used for each of the variations, the resultant series would be com-

posed of 27 models.

The number of models required might possibly be diminished by testing

models at selected end points and determining whether the magnitude of the resistance

changes warrant the testing of models at intermediate points. 8. Although it istrue that the relationships which arise out of such a series may only be strictly accurate for the particular family of forms tested, it is believed that the general relationships will not deviate greatly in other similar families of reasonably streamline forms.

CONFIDENTIAL

39

CONFIDENTIAL

9. In addition to investigating the effects of the variables given above, it may be desirablo to investigate details of shape such as curvature at the nose, curvature at the maximum section, curvature at the tail, and the slope of the longitudinal section at various points. Consequently, the family of forms chosen for the series work should also be able to define these variations. 10. A family of streamline bodies of revolution which apparently satisfies most requirements is being presently developed. The family is derived from the power series equation:
2 - alx+ a x
2

+ + aX2 + .

ansn

where y is the non-dimensional ordinate, Y/D, x is the non-dimensional abscissa, X/L, and a., a 2 , as, etc. are arbitrary constants having numerical values which are dependent upon the limitations imposed on the basic equation. The degree of the basic equation is chosen to accommodate the number of variables which are used to define the shape of the body. Typical features of shape which can be specified are: Curvature of the nose, maximum section, and tail; position of maximum section, and volume. 11. The lines of investigation suggested for the bodies comprising the proposed series are outlined as follows: 1. Resistance tests at zero angle of trim, for a. b. Deep Submergence Intermediate Depths

a. Surface 2. Resistance tests at various angles of trim, for a. b. e. 3. 4. Deep Submergence Intermediate Depths Surface

Boundary layer studies, at a. Deep Submergence Point pressure studies, at a. b. c. Deep Submergence Intermediate Depths Surface

Because of the amount of preparation and testing time required, it is proposed that the boundary layer and point pressure work be confined to only one or two selected models.
It is also proposed to include tests of the series models equipped with various nose shapes designed for the purpose of improving surface performance without serious detrimental effect on submerged performance.

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

40

12. In addition to the tests of the hull forms, it is proposed that the design of appendages be studied in conjunction with the series models in the following manner: 1. Resistance of control surfaces a. b. c. 2. Effect of size Effect of shape Effect of location

Resistance of conning tower assemblies a. b. c. Effect of size Effect of shape Effect of location

3.

Resistance of sound domes a. b. c. Effect of size Effect of shape Effect of location

13. The details concerning the series models, the most practical sizes of models and the extent of the experiments will be determined as the work progresses,

M. GERTLER Submarine and Torpedo Powering Group

CONFIDENTIAL

41

CONFIDENTIAL

C-SS/S! -2(5) C-A9-17

ENCLOSURE (A)

31 January 1946

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE RESISTANCE OF STREAMLINE BODIES OF REVOLUTION

EXPERIMENTAL 1. Jones, Williams, and Brown, "Tests on Two Streamline Bodies in the Compressed Air Tunnel," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 1710, 1936. 2. Simmons and Brown, "An Experimental Investigation of Boundary Layer Flow," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 1547, 1935. 3. Arnstein, Karl, "Some Design Aspects of Rigid Airships," Transactions of A.S.M.E., 1934. 4. Garland and Fulton, "Improving Airship Performance," Transactions of A.S.M.E., 1934.

5. Lyon, H.M., "A Study of Flow In the Boundary layer of Streamline Bodies," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 1622, 1934. 6. Gehman, S.D. and Mallory, G.C., "Skin Friction of Various Surfaces," Journal of the Franklin Institute, Volume 216, No. 3, 1933. 7. Abbot, Ira H., "The Drag of Two Streamline Bodies as Affected by Protuberances and Appendages," N.A.C.A. Technical Report No. 450, 1933. 8. Freeman, Hugh B., "Pressure Distribution Measurements on the Hulls and Fins of a 1/40 Scale Model of the U.S. Airship Akron," N.A.C.A. Technical Report No. 443, 1933. 9. Freeman, Hugh B., "Force Measurements on a 1/40 Scale Model of the U.S. Airship Akron." N.A.C.A. Technical Report No. 432, 1932. 10. Freeman, Hugh B., "Measurements of Flow in the Boundary Layer of a 1/40 Scale Model of the U.S. Airship Akron," N.A.C.A. Technical Report No. 430, 1932. 11. Klemperer, W., "Windkanalversuche an Einem Zeppelin-Luftschiff-Modell." Abhandlungen airs der Aerodynamischon Institut an der Technischen Hochschule, Aachen, 1932. 12. Lyon, H.M., "The Effect of Turbulence on the Drag of Airship Models," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 1511, 1932. 13. Upson, R.H. and Klikoff, W.A., "Application of Practical Hydrodynamics to Airship Design," N.A.C.A. Technical Report No. 405, 1932. 14. Abbot, Ira H., "Airship Model Tests in the Variable Density Wind Tunnel," N.A.C.A. Technical Report No. 394, 1931. 15. Thompson, F.L. and Kirschbaum, H.W., "The Drag Characteristics of Several Airships Determined by Deceleration Tests," N.A.C.A Technical Report No. 397, 1931. 16. Dryden, H.L. and Kuethe, A.M., "Effect of Turbulence in Wind Tunnel Measurements," N.A.C.A. Technical Report No. 342, 1930.

CONFIDENTIAL

4k. .

CONFIDENTIAL.

42

C-SS/S1 -2(5)

C-A9-17
17. Owen and Hutton, "Investigation of the Boundary Layers and the Drags of Two Streamline Bodies," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 1271 , 1930.

18. von KL-main, T., "Berechnung der Druckvertichung an Luftschiffkorfrern," Translated in N.A.C.A. Technical Memorandum No. 574, 1930.
19. Simmonc, "Experiments Relating to the Flow in the Boundary layer of an Airship Model," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 1268, 1930. 20. Blakemore, Boyle, and Meadoweroft, "Design, Construction and Handling of Nonrigid Air1929. "Drag of C-Class Airship Huils of Various 1928.

ships," Transactions of the A.S.M.E., 21. Zahm, A.F., Smith, R.H.,

and Louden, F.A.,

Fineness Ratios," N.A.C.A. Technical Report No. 291, 22. Arnstein, Karl,

"Development of Large Commercial Rigid Airships," Transactions of

A.S.M.R.,
23.

1927-1928.
"Removing BG-uidary layer by Suction," N.A.C.A. Technical Memorandum No.

Ackeret, J.,

395, 1927.
24. Hemke, Paul E., "Measurement of Pressure Through Tubes in Pressure Distribution Tests," N.A.C.A. Technical Report No. 270, 1927. 25. Higgins, G.J., "Tests of the N.P.L. Airship Models in the Variable Density Wind Tunnel,"

N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 264, 1927. 26. Havill, Clinton H., "The Drag of Airships - Drag of Bare Hulls - II," N.A.C.A. Tech-

nical Note No. 248, 1926. 27. Havill, Clinton H., "The Drag of Airships - I," N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 247, 1926.

28. Schrenk, Oscar, "Experiments With a Sphere From Which the Boundary Layer is Removed by Suction," N.A.C.A. Technical Memorandum No. 388, 1926. 29. Crowley, J.W., Jr., and DeFrance, S.J., "Pressure Distribution on the C-7 Airship," N.A.C.A. Technical Report No. 223, 1925. 30. Tuckerman, L.B., "Water Model Tests for Semi-Rigid Airships," N.A.C.A. Technical Report No. 211, 1975. 31. Zahm, A.F., "Air Forces, Moments and Damping on Model of Fleet Airship Shenandoah," N.A.C.A. Technical Report No. 215, 1925. 32. Croces, G.A., "Effect of Ratio Between Volume and Surface Area of Airships," N.A.C.A. 'echnical Memorandum No. 280, 1924. 33. Dufr, L., "The American Airship 23-3," N.A.C.A. Technical Memorandum No. 286, 1924.

34. Zahm, A.F., Smith, R.H., and Hill, G.C., "The Drag of "C" Class Airship Hull with Varying Length of Cylindrical Midships," N.A.C.A. Technical Report No. 138, 1922.
35. Jones, R. and Bell, A.H., "The Pressure Distribution cvcr a Modkl of thu Hull of Airship R. 33," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 801 (Ac. 55), 1922.

CONFIDENTIAL

43

CONFIDENTIAL

C-SS/Sl -2(5) C-A9-17 36. Frazer, R.A. and Gadd, A.G., "The Prediction of the Resistance of Rigid Airship R. 33," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 827, 1922. 37. Jones, Williams, and Bell, "Experiments on Model of a Rigid Airship of New Design," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda( No. 802, 1921-1922. 38. Pannell, J.R., Frazer, R.A., and Bateman, H,, "Experiments on Rigid Airship R. 32 Part III, Measurement of Resistance and Airspeed," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 813 (Ae. 64), 1921. 39. Munk, M., "The Drag of Zeppelin A.1 hips," N.A.C.A. Technical Report No. 117, 1921.
-

40. Riabouchinsky, D.P., "On the Resistance of Spheres and Ellipsoids in Wind Tunnels," N.A.CA. Technical Note No. 44, 1921. 41. Jones., R. and Williams, "Experiments on a Model of Rigid Airship R. 38," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 799 (Ae. 54), 1920. 42. Jones, R., Williams, D.H., and Bell, A.H., "Experiments on a Model of Rigid Airship R. 29," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 714, 1920. 43. Pannell, JR., "Preliminary Experiments on Non-Rigid Airship S.S.E. 3 100,000 with a Consideration of the Performance Data of Various Types of S.S. Airships," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 693, 1920. 44. Stahl, Frederick, "Rigid Airships,'" N.A.C.A. Technical Memoranda No. 237, 1920.

45. Pannell, J.R. and Jones, R., "Resistance Experiments on Four Models of Proposed NonRigid Airship Envelopes,' A,R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 646, 1920-21. 46. Pannell, J.R,, Jones, R. and Pell, G.N., "The Prediction from Model Experiments of the Resistance of an Airship of the 23 Class," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 619, 1919-1920. 47. Jones and Williams, "The Distribution of Pressure Over the Surface of Airship Model U3721 Together with a Comparison With the Pressure Over a Spheroid," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 600, 1918-1919. 48. Pannell, J.R. and Jones, R., "Experiments in a Wind Channel on Elongated Bodies of Approximately Streamline Form," A.R.C, Reports and Memoranda No. 564, 1918. 49. Pannell, J.R.,and Jones, R., "Experiments on a Model of a Modified Form of the N.S. Non-Rigid Airship," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 482, 1918. 50. Pannell, J.R. and Jones, R., "Experiments on a Model of the 23 Class Airship," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 456, 1918. 51. Pannell, J.R. and Campbell, N.R., "The Variation of the Resistance of Rigid Airships Models with the Scale and the Wind Speed," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 302, 1916. 52. Relf, E.F., "An Estimation of the Variation of the Drag Coefficient of a Rigid Airship Form from Model Size to Full Scale," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 245, 1916.

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

44

c-3/S1 -2 (5) C-A9-17 53. Wioselsberger, Z.F., "Experiments on Model Balloons and the Resistance of Various Kinds of Surfaces," Flugtechnik, U. Motorl, September 1915. "Theoretische and Experimentelle Untersuchungen an Ballonmodellen" Jarbuch Motorlufsohiff-Studiengesellsehaft, Berlin Springer, 1 911 -1912. THEORETICAL 55. Goldstein, S., "Modern Developments in Fluid Dynamics." Vol. II, Past Solid Bodies of Revolution," 1938. Chapter XI Entitled, "Flow 511. Fukrmann, G.,

56. Clauser, Milton and Clauser Francis, "The Effect of Curvature on the Transition from Laminar to Turbulent Boundary Layer," N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 613, 1937. 57. Gurjienko, G., "Universal Logarithmic Law of Velocity Distribution as Applied to the Investigation of Boundary Layer and Drag of Streamline Bodies at Large Reynolds Number," N.A.C.A. Technical Memorandum No. 842, 1937. 58. Munk, M., "The Computation of Apparent Mass of Dirigibles," Journal of Aeronautical Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 3, May 1935. 59. "The Boundary Layer and Skin Friction For a Figure of Revolution at Large Reynolds Numnbers," Daniel Gugeinieirn Airship Institute, Akron, Ohio, No. 2, 1935.

6o. Fediaevsky, C.C., "The Boundary Layer and the Drag of a Body of Revolution at Large Reynolds Number," Journal of Aeronautical Sciences, Vol. 3, No. 1, September 1935.
Kaplan, Karl, "Potential Flow Abe t Elongated Bodies of Revolution," N.A.C.A. Technical Report No. 516, 1935. 62. Moore, N.B., "Application of Kgrmakn Logarithmic Law to Predleblon of Airship Hull Drag," Journal of Aeronautical Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 1, January 1935. 63. Smith, R.H., "Longitudinal Potential Flow About an Arbitrary Body of Revolution with Application to the Airship Akron," Journal of the Aeronautical Sciences, Vol. 3, No. 1, September 1935. 64. Lyon, H.M., "The Drag of Streamline Bodies," Aircraft Engineering, September 1934. F

"61.

65. Dryden, Murnagham and Bateman, "Hydrodynamics," Chapter II Section 20 Entitled, "Flow about an Obstacle Whose Surface is one of Revolution," 1932. 66. Lotz, I., "Calculation of Potential Flow Past Airship Bodies in Yaw," N.A,C.A. nical Memorandum No. 675, 1932. 67. 68. Havelock, T.H., Benndorf, H., of London, 1931, "Motion of a Solid Body in a Liquid with Friction," Physik 2, 1930. 69. Jones, P.,., "Skin Friction and Drag of Streamline Bodicc," A.R.C. Reports and Memoranda No. 1199,, 1929. Tech-

"The Wave Resistance of an Ellipsoid," Proceedings of the Royal Society

CONFIDENTIAL

45

CONFIDENTIAL

C-SS/S1-2I(5) C-A9-1 7

70. "Sur une Formule pour le celcul de la Resistance d'un solid dans un Fluide Parfait Incompressible," Comptes Rendu, 189, 1929. 71. Bickley, W.G., "The Influence of Vortices Upon the Resistance Experienced by Solis Moving Through a Liquid," Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, A119, 1928. 72. Taylor, G.I., "'The Energy of a Body Moving in an Infinite Fluid with an Application to Airuhips," Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A120, 1928. 73. Millikan, Clark B., "The Boundary Layer and Skin Friction for a Figure of Revolution," Journal of Applied Mechanics, APM 54-3, 1932. 74. Jones, R., "The Distribution of Normal Pressures on a Prelate Spheroid," Philosophical Transactions, 226, 1927. 75. Zahm, A.F., No. 253, 1926. "Flow and Drag Formulas for Simple Quadrics," N.A.C.A. Technical Report

76. Ames, J.S., "A Resume of the Advances in Theoretical Aeronautics Made by Max N. Munk," N.A.C.A. Technical Report No. 213, 1925. 77. "Reaet'ion en Regime Permanent d'un Fluide Incompressible Parfait our un Solide Immerge," Comptes Rend 181, 1925. 78. "Sur Quelques Cos de Mouvements Irrotationnels a Trois Dimensions," Comptes Rend 181, 1925.

79. Swaim, L.M., "On the Turbulent Wake Behind a Body of Revolution," Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, A125, 1925.
80. Burgess, C.P., "A Method of Determining the Dimensions and Horsepower of an Airship for any Given Performance," N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 194, 1924. 81. Maatz, H., "Recent Researches in Airship Construction Part T - Forces of Flow on a Moving Airship and the Effect of Control Surfaces," N.A.C.A. Technical Memorandum, 1924. 82. Munk, Max M., "Note on the Pressure Distribution over the Hull of Elongated Airships with Circular Cross-Section," N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 192, 1924. 83. Munk, Max M., "Remarks on the Pressure Distribution over the Surface of an Ellipsoid, Moving Translationally through a Perfect Fluid," N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 196, 1924. 84. Weiselsburger, C., "Air Forces Exerted on Streamline Bodies with Round or Square Cross Sections When Placed Obliquely to the Air Stream," N.A.C.A. Technical Memorandum No. 267, 1924. 85. Munk, Max M., 184, 1923. "The Aerodynamic Forces on Airship Hulls," N.A.C.A. Technical Report No.

86. Taylor, G.I., "The Notion of Ellipsoidal Particles in a Viscous Fluid," Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, A103, 1923.

CONFIDENTIAL

I
CONFIDENTIAL

"47

APPENDIX 2 TABLES OF OFFSETS FOR SERIES 58 The Nondimensional Abscissas and Ordinates, the Dimensional Abscissas and Ordinates for a 9-foot Model, and other Geometrical Particulars are Given for Each Form of Series 58 in the Following Pages.

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL Model 4154

Serial 40050165-40

X/L
0.00 .02 .04 .06 .12 .14 .16 .18

inches 0.00 2.16 4.32 6.48 12.96 15.12 17.28 19.44 23.76 25.92 2.08 30.24 32.40 34.56 36.8 3841.04 43.20 45.36 47.542 51.84 5 511.0 0 56.1 0 58 .32 60.48 4 648t0 69.12

X in

Y/D
0.0000 .1439 .2059 .2537 .6 .3 5 .4037 .4226

inches 0.000 3.885 5 g59 6. 50 34 9.626 10.309 10.900 11.410 12.220 12,531 -12.790 13.001

Y in

Formula: Y = alx1+ax+

a 4 x4 +asx+axe

.08 .10

8.64 .2934 10.80 .327 2

where a, = +
*

1.00000

0 a. = + 2.149653 as = - 17.773496
a 4 = + 36.716580 a, = - 33.511285 a
6

10

.22 .24 .26 .28 .30 .32 .34

.20

21.60

.4526 .4641 .4737 481g .49,5 .82

.4388

11.848

= + 11.418548 -L--D =

Wetted Surface Coefficient =

4878

13.171 13.298
1 13 .4g9 13.500 13.492 13.462 13.414 13349 13 6 13.12 '1 13.079

0.7887
L 0.4644

49;2 .5000 .4997 :4944 4 917 :4882 .4844 .4799 9 .4 92 .4629 2556

. .42 .44 .46 :548 .502 4

Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy

4968

.986 4968

Model Particulars: Length, ft Diameter, ft Nose radius, ft Tail radius, ft Wetted surface, ft
2

9.000 2.250 0.2813 0.0563 50.18

.56
.6o
.62

2. 1262 57 12.522
12.668 12.498 12.304

.64

66.96

.66 .68
.70 .72

71.28

73.44
75.60

478
4287 .4174 4o46 39

12.091
11.575 11 270 192 107544.

43A8

Volume, ft3
Longitudinal center of buoyancy, ft from nose

11.848

23.26
4.180

77.76
79.92 2.28

:74
.76

.88
.

95.04 90 87.20

230
.2330

7.10o
.62

S."2 99.36 984 101.52

.88 .90
.9
98

95.84 97.20

1'63514.6141 .20 56800 .. .230 2;.)33 1.291 12.01

2000 :1635

.92 .9

99.36 101.52

103.68
105.84

.1230
o771

3.321
2.082

5. 400 4.415

..

1.00

106.00

0.0000

0.000

CONFIDENTIAL

49

CONFIDENTIAL

Model 1155

Serial 40050165-50

X/L 0.00
.02

X in inches 0.00
2.16

/D 0.0000
.11139

Y in inches 0.000 3.108 4 447

Formula: y 2 -- alx+a 2 x 2 +asxa

8

4x4+ a x 5+ a

.0o .08
.06

4.32 6.48 8.64

.2059 .2537 .2934

.3 1

.10
.12 .14

"o.8o

12.96 15.12

.3272
.32i2

6.33 7.700
.247

5.480

where a = 1

1.000000

a 2 = + 2.149653 a. = - 17.773496

.16
.18

17.28 21.60

19.44

.403j
.422 .4388 .4526

8.720
9.126 9.478

.20

.22 23.76 .24 25.92 .4641 .26 .30332.40=15 2 .08 .4737 .28 30.24 .4b15 .30 32.4o .4878 .32 .34

.36
.42

34.56 36.72

.4925 .499

9.776 10.025 10.232 10.400 10o.536 10.638

10:711

a4 = + 36.716580 a5 =
a
-

33.511285 11.418548
7L D

Wetted Surface Coefficient =

.38 .40 .44

.46

38.88

41.04 43.20 4.5.36

47.52
49.68 51.84

.50
.52 54

.48

54.00 58.32 60.48

62.6+ 8 64.80

56. 16

.4996 .5000 .499 .49Hi .4968 .4944 .4917 .4844

49 2

lo.761
10A000
10.794

=0.091
Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy=

L 0.4.644

10.770
10. ;31 10. 79

10.621
10.545 10.463 10.366
10.258 10.135

.4882

56

.4799
.4557 .44 " .43A8 .4174

Model Particulars:
Length, ft Diameter, ft 9.000 1.800

.6o

.62

.64 .66
.68

.70 .72 :74

71.28 73.44

66.96 69.12

4749 .4692

.4629 .4287
.4046

9e 9.

N w

ft
2 ft

o.

75.60 77.76
92

9.672 9.478
9.260 9.739

Tail radius, ft Wetted surface,

0.0360

39.75
14.89
4.180

o.o16

.76
.84 .88

.76
o

92.08 86.40
88.56 95.04 97.20 99.3b 101.52

.390

.39o

8.43

Longitudinal center

Volume, ft3

8.035
7.703
7.275

.82

.86
.90 .92

90.72 92.8~8

:3566 .3368 .3146 .2901

.2630 .2330 .2000 .1635

of buoyancy, ft from nose

.795

.94

.96 .98
1.00

103.68

.1230

10 .84 109.00

.0771 0.0000

5.681 5.033 4.320 3.532 2.5 1.665 0.000 CONFIDENTIAL

6.266

lI-

'CONFIDENTIAL

50

Model 4156
X/L X in Y/D Y in

Serial 40050165-60

Inches 0.00
.02

inchcs 0.0000
.111439

Formula:
y2 %ax+a1x
2

.01,

0.00 2.16 4. 32 8.64 10.80 12.q6 15.12 17.28 21.60 23.76 25.92

.2059

0.000 2.590 3.706

3x

a 4x

5+a x

+a

.o6 .08
.10 .12 .14 .16

6.48

.2537

.18

19. 44

.20 .22 .24

.26 .28 .30

28. 8
30.24 32.40 38. 88

.2934 .3272 .3565 .38Ri .403' .4226 .4388 *14526 .4641

4.567

5.281 5.890 6.417 6.82 7.267

where a1 =+ a2
a
= +

1.00000

2.149653
17.773)196

=
=

7-607 7=

a4

36.716580
3.6

d.147 8.351
8.780

.4737
.4878

. 4g

8.527 8. 667 8.865 8.926

8.968

a5 = 33,511285 a + 11.418548
-

.32 .34 .36 .38

34 56 36.72 41.04

.4925 .4959
.14962 .49

Wetted Surface Coefficient =

.140 .46
.48

41-3.20 49.68

.4996 8.993 . o000 .000 .49N

.49114

.142
.11.)[

4.5.36

47.52

8.975L

.8995 7--

Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy 0.4644

.50 -5; -54 )6 .68

.6o .62

54.00 56.16 58.32 6o.48 62.64. 64.89 6696 69.12 71.28 73.44 '5,60
77.76 7,9.92 -208 884.24 86,40 88.56

51.84

4868

8.42
8.899

.4917

.4882
.4844 .4799 .4649 4629 .4[692 .457 141 .4388 .4287
.4174

8.:7

Model Particulars: Length, ft Diameter, ft Nose radius, ft

Tail radius, ft

.6[ .66 .68 70 .72

'74

8.548 832 8.346 8203 8:6 7.898 7.717

7.513

9.000 1.500 0.1250

0.0250

.76

.i.046
.390

7.283

2 Wetted surface, ft 32.94 Volume ft0 10.34

.3744
.2901 .2630 .2330

029 6.062

.3566
.3368

6.739 6:419

Longitudinal ccntcr of buoyancy, ft from nose

4.180

.82

.84
QU .88 .0o

90.

.31'16

5.663
.222 .734 111911.

92 95.04 97.2

.92
.94

99.36
101.5 2 10

.2000 .1230 .0771

L .1635 .0000

3.600
2.943 0.000

96 .98
1.00 *

103.68 10 84

2.114 1,388

CONFIDENTIAL

51

CONFIDENTIAL

Model [1157 x/L

0.00 .02
Xn Sinches

Serial 40050165-70 Y/D

Y in inches 0.000 2.220

Formula:
6 Y =alx+a 2x+aex3+a 4 x +asx +a 6 x

0.00 2.16

o0i4 .o6 .08

4-32

6.48 10.8o
8.64 12.96 15.12 17.28 19.44

0.0000 .1439 .2059

.10
.12 .14

.2537 .29314 "32-2 . ;

3.177 3.914 14.527

where a, = + a2 = +

1.000000 2.1149653

5.046
659 .229

.16

.31
.403 .422

5-g00 5. 91 6.520

a. =

17.773496

.18 .20 .22 .224 .26 .28

21.6o 23.76

25.08 30.24.
3,2.40
36.72

25.92

.30
34 .36 .38

.14388 6.7'70 .4526 6.983 .4641 7.1603 .14737 I7.11-29. M415 7.309 7.526 .4959 7.599 .4982 7. 7 .4996 7.70b .5000 7.714 .49 / 7.710 .[9 7.693 .4944
.11917

a 4 = + 36.716580 a5 = - 33.511285 a. = + 11.418548 148765 Wetted Surface Coefficient387L D

.4o

.42 .44

38. 8 41.04 43..20

145.36 11.7-52 _t 51-.84 54 .o 56.16 58.32 5o.4 62.64 614.80

= 0:7744 Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy =-L

0.4644 Model Particulars: Length, ft Diameter, ft Nose radius, ft Tail radius, ft Wetted surface, 3 Volume, ft Longitudinal center
ft2

.146

.48 .50 .52 54 .56

49.68

l.4968

7.66

.4844 .4799 i7.W47 7.1464

.64749 .14692 .4629 7.327 7.239 7.142

:4882

7.26r_ 7.586

7 3

.58
:6o .62

9.000 1.286 0.0918 28.15 7.595 4.180

.64 .66

66.96 69.12
71. 73.44 75.60 77.76 70.92

.68 .70 .72 74

.76

.4358 .4287 .4174 .4046 0828 .39o5

*.471

.4557

7.031
6.909 6

.770 6.61 4
6.440 6.242 6.025

0.0184

0 .82 .84
.88

8 84.24 86.40 88.56 .,90.2

986 2.88

.3744 .3566 .3368 .3146

2901 .2630
.2330

.90 .92 .94

95.04 97.20

5.776o 5.502 5.196 14.8514 14.476 4.:058

uyny ft from nose

of buoyancy,

96

101.52
103%.6
10.84

99-36

.2000 .I635
.0771

3.5g5

.98

.1230

3.0 6 2.523
1 .190

1. 98

1:00

10.00

0o.000

0.000

CONFIDENTIAL

I
CONFIDENTIAL Model 4158 X/L X in
Inches 0.00 0.00 0.0000

52
Serial 400501 65-80 Y/b Y in

inches
0.000

Formula:
4 5 y =azx+aex2 +a 3 xS-a~x +asx +a 6x 6

.02 .04 .o6 .08 .10 .12 .14 .16 .18 .20 .22 .24 .26 .28 .30 .32 .314

.36
.38

.4o .44

2.16 4.32 6.48 8.64 10.80 12.96 15.1? 17.28 19.4.4 21.60 23.76 25.92 28 08 30.24 32.40 34.56 36.72 38.88 41 .04

.1439 .2059 .2537 .29341 .3272

.365

1. 9 4 3 2.780 3.11.25 3.961 4.417

where a, = + a2 = + a3 a4
=
-

1.000000 2,149653 .... 65 17.773496

.3 1 .403Z .4226 .4388 .4526 .1[641

4.813

5.154 5.450 5.705 5.9214 6.110

+ 36.716580

a. = - 33.511285
a 6 = + 11.4185118

.437

6.265
639

43.20

.4o15 .4878 .4925 4959 .4982 .4996

6:.

6585 6.649

6.695 6.750 6.746

6.731

W Wetted Surface Coefficient

s LD = 0.7727

.o000
.499 .496

6.726 6.745

.42

.146
.48 .50 .52 -54

45.36 L7.-52

Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy =-L 0.4644

149.68

51.84 54.0O0 56.16 58.32

.4968
.4844

.149414 .4917 .4882 4719 ,4 "/q9 .4692

6.o707o.4L
6.674

6.638
6,591

653

Model Particulars:

.58 58
.60

60.48 62.64
614.80 6.1? 71.28 73.44

6.1791 6.4 .11 , 6.3311

.62
.64

66.96 73.6o.4

.14629
.4-59
.447 ION8 .143 .4287

6.2)49

Length, ft Diameter, ft Nose radius, ft Tail radius, ft

9.000 1.125 0.0703 0.0141 5.815 4.180

' ""

.66 .68 .68

.70 .72

6.152
6.045 5.924 5 92i7

Wetted surface, ft2 214.58

75.60

77.76 , 84.24 85.25 ";,B 86.40 .0

88.56 90.A2 92.88 95.04 97.20 99.36

.14174

5:787
5.635 5.462 51.4 5.272 5.0514
4.814

.74
.7 .82
.84 .86 .88 .90 .92

3 .344. .3566 .3368 .3146 .2ol .2630 .2330 .2000

Volume, ft3 Longitudinal center of buoyancy, ft from nose

4.5417 .2290 3.91o 3.551 3,116 2.700

.94
.98

101.52

1635

.207

.96

103.68 lo1:84

1.0000 CONFIDENTIAL

.1230 .0771 0.0000

1.661 1.041 0.000

53 Model 4159
X/L X in Y in

CONFIDENTIAL Serial 40050165-100

inches
0.00

Y/b
0.0000

inches
0.000

Formula: Y =ax +a 2x+aexS+a 4 x 4 +a~x5+ax6 where a, = + a2 = + a.

= 2

.02 .04

.o6
-.08
.10

2.16 4.32

0.00

6.48

.- 439 .2059 .2537

1.554
2.224 2.7410

.12
.18 .20
.22

.14 .16

10.80 12.96 15.12? 17.28

8.64

.2934 .31

.32Z2 .3,6r .4037

3.169
3534 3.550 4.123 4.360

1.000000 2.149653 17.773496

19.44 21.60
23.76

.4226 .4388

4.564
4
U.88

a4 = + 36.716580
a =
-

.4526

.2 .2 . 28
.30
.32

2;.92 08 30.24
32.40
34.56

.4641 .4737 .4815

.4878
.4925

5.012 .116 5.200

5.268
5.319

33.511285 5

a6 =

+ 11.418548

S34 .6 36.72 38.88

.49R9 .49 2

5.3g8I 5.3 1 5.396 5.400

5.3 g 5 5.365

S Wetted Surface Coefficient = YL D = 0.777

AV Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy =--

.38
.40 .42 4 .4
.46

41.04 113.20 45.36 4.7 .52

49.68

.4996 .?000

.48 .50 52 -54 5.6 "58 A6 .62

.64

51.84 54.00 56.16

[49 498 4968

.4944 .4917 .4882

58.:32

60. 48 62.64 64.80 66.96

69.12

.4844
.4629
438 .4287 .4174
.4046

.4799 .Z494
.4692

5.340 5.310 5.273 5.:232 5.183 5.%129

0.46 Model Particulars: Length, ft

Diameter, ft Nose radius, ft Tail radius, ft
Wetted surface,

5.067 4.999
4.922 4.739 4. 30 4.508 4.370

9.000
0.9000 0.0450 0.0090
ft2 19.64

.66
.68 .70

71.28

73.44 75.6o

4,836

.72 74 . .82

77.76
9.92

876 82.24

Volume,

ft4

3.722

86.4 2 88.56 90.7 92.8 95.04

97.20

.86
.90

.88
.92

.3146 .2901 .2630

.2330

3566 .33683

.851 .637 3. 39 3.133 2.840

2 516

Longitudinal center 4.180 of buoyancy, ft from nose

.94 101.52 .96 103.68 .98 10. 84

1.00

99.36

.2000

.1635 .1230 .0771

1.766
1.328

2.16o

101 .00

0.833

0.0000

0.000

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL Model 41 6c X in inches 0.00 2.16 4.32 6.48 10.80 12.96 15.12 17.28 19.44 21 .6o Y/D 0.0000 .1454 .2094 .2593 .3009 .3363 -3669 .3932 Y in inches 0.000 2.243 3.231 4.001 4.642 5.18 5.. o.067

54

Serial 360501 65-70

X 0.00 02 .04 .6 .08 .10

Formula:
y a, x+a x 2 +a
= +

x%
4

x 4 +x +
5

x
6

8.64

where a1

1.000000 3,321200 24.678776

.12
.18 .20

a= + a. =
4 = -

.14

.16 .22 .2

. 4156
4347 .4500 .4641

6.412

23.76 2g:92

.4749

6.707 0,9g5 7.1 0

7. 327

+ 50.896065

a = - 45.840700
a6
=

.26
.28 .30

2.08
30.24

32.40

.4898 .4915
.4977

.4b33

.32

34.56
36.72 7

.36
.38
.40 .42 .44
.

38.88

. 9g.95 .49 2 .4961 .4934

.46 .48

41.04 43.20 45.36 47.52

5 540 -0

.5000

7.5g7 7.583 7.079 7.707 7.707 7.687 7.654 7. 612

7a-847

+ 15.302158

Wetted Surface Coefficient =

=

7.71..

S ff D995 L-D 0.7758

49.68 51.84

Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy

=--X
0- . 4594

.67 :482z

4002

7.53 7.5o9 Z0
7.315 7.315

:5 54

58.32 58.32

.58 .0
60

5~6

60.48 62.64 64,.80 66.96 69.12 71.28

47 41 .471 63

Model Particulars: Length, ft Diameter, ft 9.000 1.286

.462 .458

.458 .4 6

7.241 7.162 "7.0o7

0.988

.64 66 .68
.70 72 .74

.78
0

73.44 75.60 77.76 79.92 2.08 076 84.24 9072 92.88 95.04 97.20 99.36

.4315 .4225 .4125 .4010 .3882

.43.M

.82 84 .B6
.88 .90 .92 .94 .98 1.00

86.40 88.56

.3736 .3569
.3170 .2931 .2665 .236 .2034

6.657 6.519 6.364 6.187 5.989

6.889 6.779

Nose radius, ft
Tail radius, ft Wetted surface, ft2
0 Volume, ft Longitudinal center of buoyancy, ft from nose

0.0918
0.0184 28.20 7.595 4.135

5.764
5.507

01.5?2

96

103.68 10O584 10 .00

4.891 4.522 4.112 3. 050 3.138 -1665 2.569 .12 2 1. 31 .0752 1.207 0.0000 0.000

.338

211

CONFIDENTIAL

55
Model 4161

CONFIDENTIAL

Serial

'44050165-70

X/L
0.00 .02 .04 .08

inchori 0.00 2.16 4.32 6.48 8.64 10.80

x in

Y/b
0.0000

inches 0.000 2.203 3.130 3.839 4.425 4.923

Y in

Pormula:
2=

.1428
.2029

a1

2x

ax

.o6 .10 .12 .14 S1 6

.18 20 .22 2 .26 .28 .30 .32 .34 .36

.2488
.2868

where a, = + a2 a.
=

1.000000 1.214218

12.96
15.12 17.28 19.44 21.6oo 23.76 5492 2 8.o 8 30.24 32.40 34.56 36.72 38.88

.3191 .3472
.3715 . 3927 .4273 .42.74 .4419
.1533

5-357

5.732

ON05
a.

- 12.683118

.463Z .4716 47494 .4855 .4901

.4937

6.:36 6 '. 94 6.o18 6.994 7.154 7.276 7.396 7.491 7.562

a4 = + 26.981999
= -

25.571 605 9.058511 S

a. = +

Wetted Surface Coefficient ==

.38
.140 .42 .44 .46 .48

41.04

.4967
.4985 .4997 .5000 .4927 .1497

7.617

7.663
7.691 7.710

0.7742

43.20 45.36

14752
49.68 1 58.3 56.32 60.148

7.714
7. 710
7. b94 7.633

Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy

=L= 0.4707

.50

51.84

54.00

.4970
.4947 .49m1 .4880

7.668
7529 7.458 7.28 7.173 7.5 .904

.52 .54

.56 .58
.62 .64 .66

7.585

Model Particulars:

62.614
66.96 69.12 7128 73.44 75.60 77.76 20 Z9: 92

.48314
.4720 .4649 .471 .475 7

.68

Length, ft Diameter, ft Nose radius, ft Tail radius, ft

Wetted surface, ft 2

9.000
1.286 0.0918 0.0184 28.14

.70 .72

74
.82 .84 .86
.88

.4370 6.742 . 655 3 67 6:352 .1 21 .4117

Volume, fts

7.595
.7 :9

Longitudinal center Vlm~9cne

84.24 86 88.56
0.7.2

.300 .3672 .3405

.3176

5.863 5.665 .253 4.510

900 4.081

of buoyancy, ft from nose

92.8
95.04

.2923
.264

.90
.92

97.20
99.36 103.68 1,o0.84 108.00
1"01 .52

233.
.2004 .1636 .1230 .0770 0.0000

3.607

.94 .96 .98

1.00

3.092 2.g24 1.89 1.1; 0.000 CONFIDENTIAL

--

CONFIDENTIAL

56

Model
X/L

41162
X in Yb Yi

Serial 480501

65-70

inches .02 .04 .06 2.16 4.32 6.48 .1418 .2005 .2448

inches 2.188 3.093 3.777 5.227

Formula:

.08 .10
.12

8.64 10.80 15.12 17.28 19.44

21.60 23.76 2g:92

12.96

.2812 .3120

.20 .22 .24 .26 .28

.14 .16 .18

.3388

4.339 4.814 5.587 5.900 6.176

6.420

where a =+ 1
a. a4 a5
-

1.000000

a. = + 0.444725
=

.3621 .3824 .4003 .4161

.4299 4420 :4526

8.919726
20.564463 20.948573

=+ = -

6.633
6.819 -7.123

28.8

.30 .32 .34

30.24

.36 .38 .40 .42

.44

32.40 34-.56 36.72 38.88

41.04

.4617

6.983

a6 = + 7.859120 Wetted Surface Coefficient = S

.4697
.4823 .4871
.4912

.4764
.4944

7.247 7. 3O 7.4 1 7.515

43.20

45.36
47.52

.46 .48 .50

.52

49.68
51.84

.4969 .4985 4997 .499

7.579 7.628 7.666

7.691

= 0.7742

CB

54.00

.5000 :49b .4967 .4941

7.710 7.710

Center of Buoyancy

Longitudinal = 0.4783

7.714 7.693

.54 .56 58 .60 .62

.64

56.16 58-.32 60.48 62.64

7.663
7.623 7.316

64.80 66.96
69.12

.4906 .4807
.4742

.4861

7.569 7.00

Model Particulars: Lntf Length, ft

7.17

Diameter, ft Nose radius, ft

Wetted surface,
3 Volume, ft

1.286 0.0918

.0 9.000

.66 .68 70 .708

.72 .74

73.44 75 .60 75.60

77.76 .9 1 .2
z36 88.56

71.29

.4663 .473 . .4 62
.4350 .421.5 :4062 .3484 .2985 .2699
:38690 o
7

7.194
6.711 6.5o3

:gft 8 6.8B

Tail radius, ft
2 ft

o.o184
28.14

.76 76 .84 .86 .88 .90

.82

6,267 6027 5.
5.375

Longitudinal center of buoyancy,

ft from nose

7.595 4.304

90.72

.3247 .23'8

5.010

.94 96 .98

.92

97.20 99.36 101.52

103.68 1

92:Z8' 95.04

4.607 4.164

3.677

.2038

.1660 .0777

3.144

iog:84

.1246

2.561 1.199
0.000

1.922

1.00

0.0000

CONFIDENTIAL

57
Model 4163
X/L

CONFIDENTIAL

Gerial 520501"
Y/D Y in

5-70

inches 0.00 2.16 4.32 6.48

X in

inches 0.000 2 177 3.063 3.724 4.721 5.113 5.454 5.,753 6.019 6. 250

Formula:
2

0.00 .02 .04 .o6

.08
.10 .12
.14

8.64 1o.8o
12.96 15.12 17.28 19. 44 21.60 23.76 25.92 28.08 30.24

0.0000 .1411 .1985 .:2414

=a

X+a X2 +a x3 +a x4 +a X5 4-a x6
2 = + = -

a1

4 1.000000

.2764 .3660
.3314 .3535 .3729 .3901 .4051 .4185
.4303

4.264

where a, a2

0.139160
6.590919

a3 =

.16 .'18 .20 .22 .24 .26 .28

a4

+ 17.669802

6:457

a. = - 19.81 0192 a6 = + 7.870480

.4409 .45o2

,30
.32 .34

32.40 34e56
36.72

.4585
.4658 .4781

6.639 6.802 6.946

7.288

7.074
7.157

s
Wetted Surface Coefficient
2L

.4724

.36 .38 .40 .42 .42 .48 .50

38.88

7.376

41.04 43.20 45,.36u 457.2

.4631 .4875 .4912 .4912

7.4154 7.521 7.579. 7.626

= 0.7746

x Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy =T

=

.46

49.68 51 .84
54.00
56.16

.52

'.[967 7.663 4.985 7.691 .4996 7.708

.5000 7.714

0.4868

..54

56

58.32
60.48 62.64
64.80

.456
-4961 .4 30

.49 3

7.708
7.688

.58 .60 .62

.64

7.6 54 7- 40
. 55 7.350 7.222 7.072 6.6q0
7

Model Particulars: Length, ft

9.000 1.286 0.0918 0.0184

66.96
69.12 71.28

.487
.4 .46

7.606

Diameter, ft
Nose radius, ft Tail radius, ft

.66 .68
:70 72

.4832

73.44
75.60

47Z64 4. 481 .43 .415

.:101'2
1

77.76
Z92 .08
84.24

Wetted surface, ft2 28.16 7.595 Volume, ft3 Longitudinal center of buoyancy, 4.381.

:74 76

6.457
6.190

6.o

.84 88.56 90.72 ..86 92.88

95.04 o90 97.20 :92 99.36 .94 101.52 :96 103.68 .98 105.84 1.00 105.00

.78 0 .82

86 .40

.3817

3g .30 57
.36oo
.2790 .2 .62 .2103 .1710 .12.7 .0759 0.0000

5.889
U7

5.554
4.305 3 799 3.245 2.635 1.970 1.2'17 0.000

ft from nose

.88

CONFIDENTIAL

I
CONFIDENTIAL Model 4164 X/L 0O00 .02 .04 X in inches 0.00 2.16 4.32 Y/ 0,0000 .1407 [ Y in inches Formtula: Y x+aex2 + 1=a a
+a

58 Serial 40050155-70

0.000
2.171

x 5+a x6

.1981

3.056
3.726 4 280

.o6

.08

.10 .12 .14 .1I6 .18 .20 .22

6.48 8.64 10.80

.2415 .2774

where a, = +

1.000000

12.96 15.12 17.28

19.44

.3084 .3680 .3820 .4016 .4192 4349

4.758

a.=23358

0.475347 8.564671

5.0.5 5:;56 . 94
6.197

a. = + 0.601504
= -

21.6o

6'498 6.926 7.113 7.275 7.409

7.520 6.710 a. = -

.24
.26

23.76

2.:92

.28 .30

2 0o

.32

.34 .36 .38 .40

.42 .11.j

30.24 32.40 34.56 6.72 38.88 43.20

41.04 45.36
47.52

.4993

.4489 .4610 .4715 .11802 .4874 .4929 .4979 .5000

.4993
.4970

a5 = + 12.426215

4.987703 s o6666954

7:605
7.703

Wetted Surface Coefficient =

7.714
7.6

.46 .48

-50 .52

49.68 51.84

.4931

7.681

Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy =

.54 .56 .58 .60

.62 .64 .66 .68 .70 .72 74

54.00 56. 58.32 6o0.48 62.64 64.80 66.96 69.12 71.28

73.41

.4878

.4810 .47 29 4634 .4 2 .44014 .4271 .:1126 .3 04 .3629 .3445 .3255 .3059 .2858 : 26rr 2449 24 .2244 .2040 .1840 .1643 .151 .1263 .1073 .0869

7.6o8 7.526

= 0.4295
Model Particulars: M6"c1 9.000 Length, ft 1.286 Diameter, ft N 0.0918 Nose radius, ft Tail radius, ft 2 0.0184 Wetted surface ft 25.28
3 6.427 Volume, ft Longitudinal center 3.866 uyac o uyny ft from nose

7.21 7.296 Z50

6.795
6.59o 6.366 6.125 5.869 5.599 5.315 5.022 4.720 4.409f J.96 3.778 .098 3. 462 3.1147 2.839 2.535 2.239 I .9!19 1.655 1 i1.341

.3970

75 60 77.76 9.92 .76 Z2.08 .78 86.4o .20 84.24 86.4 88.56 .82 .184 90. 2 92.8 .86 95.04 .88 97.20 .90 99.36 .92 .94 101.52 103.68 96

1.0 c

C98 OF oto 84 oi

.o618 0.0oooo

oQ53 o.0ooo

CONFIDENTIAL

II
59
Model 4165 X/T X in inches y/D Y in inches
Formula: CONFIDENTIAL

Serial 400501 60-70

.06 .08
.10

6.48 8.64 10.80 .2855 .31 9

3.20 02476 where a. = + 4.405 4.905 a2

=

1.000000
0.837153

.12 .14 .16

.18

12.96 15.12

.20

17.28 19.44

.22 .24 .26 .28

21.60 23.76
25.92 25.08 30.24

.3462 .3710 .3930 .4123 .4260 .4439 .456 .4Z41 .4900

5.341 5.724 6.063

6.361

a. = -

8.585996
10.542535 3.215422

6.573 6.849
7.043 7.211 7.352

a 4 = + 14.075954 a. a6
= =

.4674 .4765 .4944

.30 .32 .34

32.40 34.56
36.72

7.469
7.5660
7.628

WtSi
urace = aoecen L D

.36 .38 .40 .42

.44 .6 4

38.88
41.04

.4976
.4994

43.20 45.36
47.52 49.68

.5000 .499g
.495 .45

7.677 7 705 7:714

7.707 7.6780 t.637

= 0.7374
Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy

x
=-

.48

.50
52

54 .56 58
.60 .62 .64 .66

51.84 54.00 56.16 58 32

60.48

:4

11 4864

7.577
7.312 7.197

7.04
15
Model Particulars:

0.4484

.4876

.4739

62.64
64.80
66.96

.4665

.458b .4486
.4384

7.o6

69.12

.68 .70 .72

7.

71.28
73.44

.4273
.3890
.374.

6.921 6.764

Length, ft N,

4154
.4026

6.:93 6

Diameter, ft

Nose radius, ft

9.000 1.286

0.0918

75.60 9.9

6.212

.74

77.76
84.24

6.002
5.280

:3 82
.3245
.305-9

5.775 5.536
.o007
7

Tail radius, ft 0.0184 Wetted surface, ft2 26.81

3 Volume, ft

7.011
4.036

z8

Longitudinal center of buoyancy,

0 .82 .84 .86

.88

86.40

88.56
90.2 92.88
95.04

.2861 :2652 .2429

.2193

4.414 4.09?
3,7148

20

ft from nose

.90
.92 .96

97.20

99.36 103.68 .94 .9 101.52 136

9 10.8

3.383 .1941 1 .995 .1672 2 .133 .0 4 133 2.134 ioo5 1.64

A99 I.07
0.0000

.0 0

106O0

0.000
CONFIDENTIAL

" " "" :- ': -:

,:" ;'.. .. ~-JL"' ~ :,

".4."
t . '

S.. ....":':.. " .....

CONFIDENTIAL Model 41 66
X/L
_n

6o Serial 40050170-70
YD Y in

inches

inches

Formula:
2 2 3 4 + = a y - 1x+a 2 x +a 3x +a 4 x + 5 + a6 X5 iax X

0.-00
002

0.00 2.16 6.48 8.64 10.80 12.96 15.12

4.32

0.0000 .1455
.209

0.000

.04

.06
.08 .10 .12 .14

.16
.18

17.28
19.44 21.60 23.76
25.92 28.08 32.40

.2591 .3010 .3362 .3664 .3922

.4141

4.hr 5.187 5.653 6.051

2.245 3.235 4.05

where a,

1.000000

a-0 a2 =+

3.462153

.4327

.20 .22 .24 .26

.28
.30

30.24 34.56 36 41.04 43.20

415.3 6

.4483 .4611 .4716 .4799 .4865

.4915

6.676 6.917 7.i14

7.2765

6.369

a. = - 26.960996 a. = + 59.35721 + a. = - 56.48003 a. = + 19.62167

_

7.404 7.5o6

.32

.34
.42

.38 .4o

367.99

.44 .50

t:.2

.4950 7.637 .'4974 7.674 7.711 .4998 .00 7.714 .98 7.711 . 7 .4994 .4986 .497B

7.583

Wetted Surface Coefficient = TrL D

=: 0.8o94 Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy

0.4781 Model Particulars: Length, ft

.4 47.52 .46 9q. 68 .48 51.84 .52 .54 .56 56.16 58.32 60.48 62.64

54.00

.4968

7.0 7b2 7. 68o 7.649 7.629 7.606 7.579

.58 .60
.62 .64

64.80

.4958 .4945 .4930 .4912

7.6650
9.000

.66 .68

71.28

66.96 69.12

.4890
.4723

7.55
7.501 7.444

Diameter, ft
Nose radius, ft

1.286
0.0918 29.42

.4862 .4825

.4780 .4b51 .43g3 .4 .15 .4010 .3807

.3573 .3306
.2280

.70 .72 .74

73.44 75.60
84.24 86.40

7.315

77.76 9.92

.4565 .4 6b

7.2 7.171 0.043 6.881

Tail radius, ft

0.0184

Wetted surface, fta Volume, ft Voue t 3

8.179
4.303

76 A8 .82
.84 .86

08

6:685 6.4J7 5.874

5.513 51.01

6.1_87

Longitudial center of buoyancy,

ft from nosq

.88 .90
.98

.92 94

88.56 9N0.72 92 .8 95.04 97.20

101.52
99.36

.3004 .2663
.1853

4.635
3.515

4.10o
2.859

.96 1.00

103.68 1o0.00

105.84

.1376

0.0000

.0837

2..23
1.291

0.000

CONFIDENTIAL

61
Model 41

CONFIDENTIAL

67 X in
Y/D
0.0000

Serial 400001 65-70 Y in

inches 0.000 0 092 1.:99 Formula:

-0.00 .02 .04

X/L

.o6

inches 0.00 2.16 4.32

.0643
.1231

y -3

x+a

x+a

5x+ x

648

.-,763 .2673
.2243

2.720

vaere a,
a2
=

o.ooooo
+ 11 .337153

.10

08

8.64 10.80 15.12 17.28 19.4-4 21.60 23.76

.12

.14 .16

12.96

S.18
.20 .22 .24

.3397 .3695
.3955 .4178

.3057

34 61 4.124 5.241 5.701 6.102 6.446 6.738

4.717

a. = - 50-335996 a4
=

+ 91.950954

26 .28
:30 .32 .,34 .. 6 3

2.92

.4367
.:4527 .4657 .4844 .4907 49 0 .49 I

6.985

a 5 = - 78.042535 a 6 = + 25.090422 iuetted Surface coefficient = *-S = 0--6D = 07688 Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy

08

7.185

32.40 34.56 36.Z2 38.88 41.04

30.24

463

7:349

7.474 7.571 7.639 7.68Q 7.708

.40 .42
.44

38

43.20

45.36
47.52

.4996 .496

.4996 .5000
.498g

7.714
7.691

7.708 7. 66
=

x 0.4899 o

.46 .48
.50 .52 54

51.84 54. 00 56.16 58.32 62.64 64.80 66.96

49.68

.49418 .4924 .4897 .4870 .4772 .4732 .4687

.4634 .4574

.56 58 .6o .62 .64

.66 .68 .70 .72

7.634 7.597 7.555 7."14

60.48

Model Particulars: Diameter, ft

.4839 .4807

7. 7.363
7.151

66 7.417
7.301 7.231 ;

Leghft.0 Length, ft

9.000 1.286 0.0000

0.0184 27.95

69.12
75.60

71.28 73.44

Nose radius, ft

77.76 .74 Z9:92 .7608 84.24 2.8

86.40

.4%314 .4194 .40 3

.3888

.4 02 .4 16

9 6.656 6.471 6. 253

6.813
5.999

Tail radius, ft Wetted surface, ft2

Volume, fto
Longitudinal center of buoyancy,

7.595
4.410

ft from nose

.82

.84 .86 .88 .9o

.92 -., .96

88.56
90.72 92.88 95.04 101.52 103.68

.3696
.3476 .2606 .0830 0.0000
.2237 .1823 .1359 .3222 .2933

5.702

5.363
4,971 4.525 3.451 2.813 2.0,7

97.20 99.36

4.021 1. 1 0.000

1.00

98

105.84 1o0.00

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL Model 4168

62

Serial 400301.65-70

X/

Xin i
inches

Y yin
inches
0.0000

Formula: Y2 =aix+a 2 xe+asxS+a 4 x 4 +a.xs+a 6 xa

0.00

.02

0.00

.04 .o6 .08 .10

.12

.14 .16 .18 .22

4.32 6.48 8.64 I0.80 12.96

15.12 17.28 19.44 21.60 23.76

2.16

.1187

.3046

.1775 .2259 .2679

1.831 2.739 3.485 4. 133

0.000

where a, = + o.6ooooo
a., = + 5.824657

.3371 .3655

4.700

5.201 5.639 6.3P7 6.?

6.887 39

".20
.24 .26 .28
.30

.3914 .4120
L305

a. = - 30.798496 a.
=

+ 58.810329
+2

:4464

25.92 26.08 3Q.24 34.56 36.72 38.88

32.40

.4596 .4705 4165 .4918 .49 6 1. t982

.

7.091 7.259

a, = - 51.323785

.4794

7.396

a6 = + 16.887297 Wetted Surface Coefficient erL S D

S36

.32 .34

7.506 7.588 7.646 1 7.68y

.38 .4o
.42

41.04 43.20
45.36

.4996 .5000

7.7o6
7.71
7.:o8

=0.7732
Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy =

.4996
. 495

.'44

.46 .48

47.52 54.00

.50

49.68 51.84

496 :4946
.4920

7. o1L 7.6 5 7.631

7.591

= 0.4746
[

56.16 58.32 .56 : 52 48 0.8 6 6 .28 62.67 .6o 64.80 .62 66.96 .64 69.12 .66 71.28 .68 73.44 .70 75.60 .72 77.76 .76 Z2.08

.52 .54

.4854 .48152 177 .4b70

.4610 424 4

.4888

7.541

7. 4-9

-(.429 7 . 3698 7.363

7.288

Model Particulars: Length, ft Diameter, ft

7.205

76 o

08 86.40
88.56 90:Z2

84.24

.4541 .263 .4374 .4272 .4023 .3871 402 .3698

.3503 .3282

7.113

Nose radius, ft
Tail radius, ft 2 Wetted surface, ft

7.006 6.886 6.748 6.591

9.000 1.286 0.0551 0.0184 28.11

Volume, fs
Longitudinal center

7.595
4.272

5.972
5.40 Z.06

6.207

6.207 5:4705

f fom uonose of f
buoyancy, rmns

.82 .84

. 86
.92

92.88

.3034
.2756 .1713
.1283 .0795 O,.0000 .2414 .2098

.681

.88 .90

.94
96 .9 1.00

99.36 101.52 103.68 105.84 10t. 00

95.04 97.20

3.237 2.643 1.979 1 227 0.000

4,252 3.771

CONFIDENTIAL

63 Model 41 69 X/L 0.00 .02 o.04 .06 .08

.12

CONFIDENTIAL

Serial 400701 65-70 Y/D 0.0000

.16514

X in inches 0.00 2.16 14.32 6.48 8.64

Y in Inche 0. 000 2.552 3.561 4.300 4.888 5.381

5.783

Formula: y 2 alx+a x 2 +a xa 1.400000 1.525347 4.748496 + 14.622829

-

x4+a xs +a x 6

.10

.1il .16 .18

12.96 15.12 17.28 19.44

10.80

.2308 .2787 .3156 .3488

.3748

where a, = + a2 =a. =a4

=

.3974 .4166 .4330

.20
.22 .24 .26 .28 .30 .32 34 36

21.60

23.76 25.92 o8 30.24 32.40 34.56 36.72 38.88

.469

6.131 6.428 6.681 7.077 7.231 7.358 7.461

.587
.4687 N60 .4836 .4891 .,49, .*3 11-984

6.895

as =

15.698785
5.949797

a. = +

7.546
7.609 7.657 7.6o90 S Wetted Surface Coefficient = fL-D

.38
.40 .42 .44

41.04
43.20 45.36 47.-52

.L.996
.5000 .149O7 .4986

7.708
7.714

= 0.7750
Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy X 0.4542

.46
.52

.48 .50 .54

49.68
51 .84 54.00 56.16 58.32 6o0.48 62.64 64.80 69.12 71.28 73.44 75.6o

.4968

7.710 7. 93 7.665

.56

.58 .64

.60 .62

66.96

.49114 7.628 .4914 7.582 .14876 7.523 14833 7. M4u7 .4783 7.30 Model Part iculars: .4726, 7.292 Length, ft .t 60480 7.2920e gt , f .46 7.190 Diameter, ft .4505 .14 13 .4311 .41,qQ .55 .3 82

4587

.66 .68
.70 72
.7174

77.76
79.92 82.08

.401 o

.9.51 6. 09 6.651 6._78 6.0I7 5.835

.077

9.000 1.286 0.1286

Nose radius, ft

6.284

Tail radius, ft O.0184 Wetted surface, ft2 28.17 Volume, ft3 Longitudinal center 7.595 4.088

.76 0 1) .82
.814 .86 .88 .90 .92 .94

86.40 88.56
90.72 92.88 95.04 97.20 99.36 101.52 103.68 105.84 10.00

.3429 .3226
.3005 2763 .21498 .2210 .1896 .1553 .1176 .0746 0.0000

.9 5.57 4.977
14.636 4.263 3.85LL 3.1410 2.925 2. 96 1.814 1.151 0.000

ft buoyancy, of from nose

.96 .98
1. 00

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL
Model 4170

64
Serial 401 001 Y

65-70

X 0.00

Xin 0.00
4 32 6.48 8.64

Y in inches iinche Formula: 0.000 4.073 4.820 '5. 86

.02

.o4 O

2.16

0.0000 .2640 .3124 .3491

.191

2.979

lx+a x +asx +a 4 where al = + 2.000000

-

+ asx +a6x

.o6 .08

.10
.12 .14
.16 .18 .20 .22

2
2

15.12 17.28 19.44 21.60 23-.76

2-

12.96

o.8o

.3778 :.4008 .4196

4 .4589 .467

5. 2 6.18 6.47T4
6.71

7.037847
18.517796

a.

+ 14.789004

6.

2g 2
34.56 36.:2 )8.88

.28 .30

.32 .34 36

30.24 32.140

.1494 '+900 .*4986

.14868 .14910

7.=3 7.430

7.080 7.219

4 = -

a 5 =+ 11.o19965
ae
-

:O
.46 .48 .50
5 44

41.04 ,43.20 .4 5-36 47.52 149.68 51 .84 54.O0 56.16

5.. 32

7.626 7.bb5 7. 693

7.511 7.5675-

2.253328

Wetted Surface Coefficient = irL D 0,7744

Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy =-

.. .0oo 4
.8496

771
7.71014
7

.52

.4968 .49143 .409 6. 7

-48

7.665 7.626 7.574 7.50

7. 32 7 ' 1.6 g5 6:.26 6.267 5.510
52of

0.4389

.6o .62 .66 .68

.5862.674
66.96

64.80

.4 .:46123 .4
24

Model Particulars: Length, ft Diameter, ft Nose radius, ft Tail radius, ft

2 Wetted surface, ft 3 Volume, ft Longitudinal center
fT

9.000 1.286 1..286 0.1837 0.0184 28.15 3.950

.62 69.12
.70 S.

40

71.28 .4 316 73.4'4 ."194 75.60 .:4062 . 7992 ]7 .043 .3760

:92. :376
82 3O

6.654 6.471 5.801o

258

840 .82 .88 .90 92 :94 8

1.00

.3212 08

buoyancy,

ft from nose

88.56

84 02 92. 86 8 95.04 97.20 1099.36 o :0 g82

96 03

.3002

.2286 .2017 .1729 .1422

.1088

.4.286 2541

4.632
3.920 3.527 3.112

2.668 2.194u
1. b70

1
10

84

00

o0707

o0000 0.000

1.091

CONFIDENTIAL

I.

65
Model 4171

CONFIDENTIAL Serial 110050065-70

X/L 0.00 .02 .04 .06 .08 .10 .12 .14 .16 .18 .20 .22

X incs inches 0.00 2.16 432

0.0000 .1446j

.2550 8.64 . 2951 10.80 .3292 12.96 .3g -7 15.12 .3 41 17.28 .4060 19.44 .4248 21.60 .4408 23.76 .4544 25.92 .4657 .26 28.08 .11750 . 28 30.24 .4U25 . 32 .40 .4885 .3 32 36=-.Z2 .4962 34.56 .4930

6.48

o2068

Y in inches 0.000 2.226 3.191 3.934

Formula:

1,2
Yaax1+a~x +asx where a, =+ a2 a.
=

2
6

+a 4 x'+axS+a x6

4.553

1.000000 2.449653 19.962385

5.079

5.534
5.926 6.264 6.801 7.011 7.185 7.32 7. 44u 7.5ee3 7 .656 7.60

= -

6.554

:L'4

a = + 42.424913 a5 = - 39.761285 a, = + 13.849103

1

S Wetted Surface Coefficient =

irL D S

36 :38 .4o .42 .44 .4-8 .50 .52 .54 .56

38.88 4.1.04 43.20 45.36 47.52 49.68 51.84 54.00

. 4996 :49 .5000 .4927 .49u8 .4971 .4950 .:g25 4.,4"

.46

56.16
58.32 60.o8

.485

.58

62.64
64.8o

.4818

.4771

7.7o0=6.71 9 = 0.7718 7.714 7.Z10 x 7 Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy = f 7,670 7.637 = 0.4618 7.599 7'43. 7:9,7 Model Particulars: 7.L33

7.361

.60
.62

.4718

Length, ft

7 2Z9

.66
.68 .70 .72 74 .76 X

66.96 71.28
73.44 75.60 77.76 2.02 28.2 84.24

.4057

7. 5
7.077
6 6.656

Diameter, ft

9.000

Nose radius, ft

1.286

0.0918

450
. 17 .4314 .4196 .4o62 391 373a

Tail radius, ft
Wetted surface,- ft2 Volume, ft' Longitudinal center of buoyancy, ft from nose

0.0000
28.06 7.595 4.156

6.474
6.267 6.034 5-769.

.82 ".84
.88 .94
86 .90 92 .96 98 1.00

88.56
g

.3.30
.)UOO .2819 .2520 ,2190 .182 .142Z .0992 .0517 0.0000

13,P
4-. (04

92.48 95.04! 97.20 99.36 101.52 103.68 lo5.8

4.34 3.888 3.379 2.819 2.203 1.531 0.798 0.000

_o_.00

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

66 Serial
Y/D Y in inches Formula: y
2M

Model 4172 I X in
inches

4005(005)65-70

0.00 .02 .04

.08 .10
.12 .1

.6

6.48 8.64 10.80

12.96
15.12

0.00 2.16 4.32

0.0000 .1441 .2064

.2543-

0.000

2.223

al+x+a

2X

+asxx+a

4 x4+a

x +a6 xe

3.184
3.923

.16 .18
20 .22
28 :30 3

"24
26

17.28 19.44 21.60 23.76

25.92 30.24 32.40 34.56 36.72

.2942 .3282 3F76 .3530 .4049 .4234 439d

4.53? 5.064 5.517

5.909

Where a, = +

1.000000

a, " +
a.
a4

2.299653
18.867941

6.247 6.537 6.785

-+ 39.570746
-

.4535 .4649
.474 .4020 .4881 .4928

6.997 7.173
7.319
7. 437 7.531 7.603 7.708

a5 =
6

36.636285

28.08

+ 12. 633825

.34 .3 38

38.58
41.04

4961 .4983

7.65g4 7.6 8 7.714 7Z

Wetted Surface Coefficient a 0.7732

.4996

.42

43.20 47523

.46
.48

49.68
51.84

.5000 .49? .4969

.4947

Longitudinal center of Buoyancy

7.666
7.6:.,3
-

0.4631

.50 .52

54.00

56.16
58.32

.4921

.54

.4888
.4851

7.592 7.541
7.484

56 .58 60
.62 64

0.48 62.64

.4809

.4760

64.80
66.96 71.28
75.60 69.12

4n .463
,4572

7.420 7.344 7.259 7.163 6.636

Model Particulars:

Length, ft

9.000
1.286
0.0918

Diameter, ft
Nose radius, ft

3.054

.66 .68 :70

73.-4

,4,, 3
.43Q1

.4402 .4185
.394054

&.932 6,792 6.457

6.255

Tail radius, ft
Wetted surface, ftO
8 Volume, ft

0.0092
28.11

7P
4

77.76

7.595
4.168

: , O.of
90.72 f82 .88 95,04 9;:20 103.84
lot-~ 84

Longitud inal center ft from nose

buoyancy,

o
188 go

8,556W6 8. 0
17 A261 ,25J5 , 221
1-. 414

R 92 36 101. o 9
:98

,1915
,1 1 .1115

3 .73 N,48

2,95B
236
____ ________1_______1_

1100

00

0,000

0,006

CONFIDENTIAL

67
Model 4173
X/L 0.00 .02 .04 X iII inches 0.00 2.16 4.32 6.48 8.64 Yi 0.0000 .1438 .2055 .2530 .2925 .3262 .3554 0 .4021 .4215 .4378 .4517 .4634 4 :10 31 .4874 .492g .4958 .4982 Y in inches 0.000 2.219 3.171 3.903 4.513 5.033 5. 3 5.874 6.212 6.503 6.755 6.969 7.151 7.299 7.421 7.520 7.595 7 649 7:687 7.707 7.714 7.708 7.691 7.662 7.625 Formula:
2

CONFIDENTIAL

Serial

4005 (015) 65-70

x+ax 2 +a x8 +a
" a
1 2

a a

+a x

x 1.000000 1.999653

.o6
.08

where a, = + a, = +

.10
.12

1o.80

.14
.16 1 .18 .22 .24 .28 .30

".20

12.96 15.12 17.28 19.44 2i.60 23.76 2g:92 .08 30.24 32.40 34.56 36.72 38.88 41.04 43.20 45.36 47.52 49.68 51.84

a. = - 16.679052 a. a. a. + 33.862413
-

30.386285

+ 10.203269

.32 .34 .36 .38 .140 .42 .44 .46 .48

s Wetted Surface Coefficient = 7L D = 0.7760

.4995

.5000 .4996 .496 .4966 .4942

Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy

=-

- 0.4657

.50 .52
.54 .56

54.0o 56.16

.4912
.4836 .4790 .4 0 .4615 .4542 .4363 .4274 .4163 .4-039 374 .3574 .3386
.3175

7.579 7.523
7. 61 7.390

Mod
Model Particulars: Length, ft Diameter, ft Nose radius, ft Tail radius, ft Wetted surface, ft2 Volume, fts 9.000 1.286 0.0918 0.0276 28.21

58.32 60.48

.58 .60

62.64
64.80 66.96 69.12 73.2 75.60 77.76 79.92 84.24 b 86.4 88.56 90.72 92.88 95.04

.4jJ7

7.30'9
7.221 7.120 7.o08 6. 6.794

.62 .64 .66 .70 .72 .74

.76

92.o8 .3901

6.423 6. 232

6.039
5.71 5.517 Z:224
14.8991

8 .82
.84

Longitudinal center
of buoyancy, ft from nose

7.595 4.192

.86 .88

.90
.92 .94

97.20

.2940 .2683

.23g7

4.536 4.13

37698

:96 98
1.C00

99.36 101.52

103.68 105.84
10d.00

.20 1 .1729

.1334 .0871

3.211 2.668

1.34
0.000 CONFIDENTIAL

0.0000

CONFIDENTIAL
Model 4174

68
Serial 40050265-70

X/L 0.00 .04

X in inches
2.16

Y in inches .006 .2051 .2523 .2916 .3252 .3543 02.216 3.164 3.893 4.499 5.017 5.466 5.855 6.0a3 6. 6 6-738

Formula: Yn.aax+a
2

x2+a.xs+a i.000000 1.849653

X4+a xS+a xG

.06
.08 .10 .12 .14 .16

4.32 6.48 8.64 10.80 17.28

where a, = + a2
=

12.96 15.12 19.44

21.60 23.76

.379
.014

a8 = - 15.584607 a4 = + 31 .o08246
a5 = - 27.261285 a6
=

.18
.20 .22

.4204 .4367

.24
.26 .28 .30 .32 .34 .36 38 .4o .42

25.92
2.08 30.24 32.40

34.56

36.72 38.88 41.04

.4724 .4505 .4870 .4920 .4956 4981

.4626

4508

7.13

6.955

7.288 7.413 7.514

8.987991 S

7.51
7.68s

Wetted Surface Coefficient - nL T)

!3.20 45.36

.4995

t.685
7.707 7.690

0.7772 Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy =1

0.4671

.5000

7. S.2

4996

Z494

7.714 7.708 7 .660

7.620 7.572

.48
50

.46

49.68
51.84 54.00

.4965
.493g .4905

.52 .54 .5
5 .58

56.16
64.80 66.96 69.12 71.21

862.64

58.32 6. 48

.4571
.4667 .4601
1452

7. 49 .4828 7.375 ,44780. .47806 775 7.292 .4726

.

7: -5

Model Particulars: Length, ft Diameter, ft Nose radius, ft Tail radius, ft Ta Wetted surface, ft 2

9.000 1.286
0.0918

.6o .62 . .66

64

7.201 .09 0 6.63

0.0367 28.25 7.595

.66 .68 .70

.72 .7 76 .82 .84 .86

71.2 73.44 75.60

77.76 992 9a ' Z 88.56 90.72 92 .8 97.20

438 .4260
.435.8 .4151 401

6.74 6.724 6.57

6Volume, 6.219

4031

.3898 .3405 .320 .2982 .246-2

.2159 .1815

0.o 86.40

84 7 750 .3556 .2735 .1430 .09b0 0.0000

6.014 5.786 5.533 4.220

6.o1

Longitudinal center of buoyancy, ft from nose

8 ft

4.204

-2-3 9. 3 4.601 3.799

3.331 2.805

.88

95.04
99.36 101.52

.90
.92

.96 .98 1.00

.94

103.68 1004.8 10 .00

2.206 1.481 0.000

CONFIDENTIAL

69
Model 4175

CONFIDENTIAL

Serial 40050160-50 Y/D 0.0000 .1423 .2020 .2476 .2855 Y in inches 0.000 3. 074 4.363 5.348 6.167

X/L 0.00 .02 .04 .06

X in inches 0.00
2.16

Formula:
2

a
2x+a

x +asx

S+'
4x 4

.o8 .I0
.12 .14 .18 .20 .22 .24

1o.80

4.32 6.48 8.64

asx

+aa6

where a, = + a. = + a a4 a.
a6
=

1.000000 0.837153 8585996

.3179

"1.6

.26

12.96 15.12 17.28 19.44 21.60 23.76 25.92

6.867

258.0

.3462 .3710 .3930 .4123 .4260 .4439 .4565 .4765 .4841 .4900 .4944

46 4

.28 .30 .32 .34

.36
.38 .4o .42

30.24 32.40 34.56 36.72 38.88 41.0114 45.36 147.52 49.68

I0.O96

7.1178 014 8.489 8.906 9.202 9,588 9. 6o

+ 114.075954 10.542535

= =

.14976

43.20

.4994 .9000 .49

10.292 10 . 457 10.584 10.679 10. 742 10. 787 10. 00 10 692

3.215422
=

Wetted Surface Coefficient

IrL

= 0.7426 Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy

.44
.46

.14979
.4950

10.789 10.F2L io.608

10.5o6 10.381 10.236

.48

51.84
54.00 56.16 58.32

.50 52 54 .60

14911

.14864 .A806 .4739

.4484
Model Particulars: Diameter, ft Nose radius. ft Tail radius, ft Wetted surface, ft' Volume, ft8 Longitudinal center of buoyancy, ft from nose

.56 5.8

60.48 62.64
64.8o 69.12 71.28 75.60

.04665 .4.580
.4486 .14273
.4154

10.076 9.893
9.69g0

Length, ft

9.000
1.8oo 0.1800 0.0360 37.79 13.74 t..0 36

.62

.64 .66 .70 72 .74. 0

66.96

.4384
.3890 .7776 3743 3858 3 .3245 .3059

9.4469

.68

9.230 -.973 8.402 8.085 7. 750 7.392 7.009 .607 5.728 4.737 4. 193 3.612 2.987 2.300 1.510 0.000

73.44
92.0 84.24 7 86.40

.4026

8.696

.74

79.9_2

.82
.84

88.56
90U

.286i

6.18o

.86
.88

92

.2652

.90
.92 94

.96

98 1.00

95.04 97.20 99.36 101.52 103.68 1og:84 1 00

2429

.2193 .1941 .1672 .1353 .1065 .0699 0.0000

5.247

CONFIDENTIAL

1"

CONFIDENTIAL

70 Serial 40050155-50 Y/D Y in inches Formula:

Model 4176 X/L X in inches

0.00 ,02
.04

0.00 2.16
4.32

0.0000 .1407
.1981

0.000 3.039
4279-

ya alx+a212+ asxo+ ax+ as + a x"

where a a + 1.000000
-

.o6

08 .10
.12

8.64 10.80
12.96

6.48

.14 .16 .18 .20

.22 .24 .26 .28 .30

15.12 17.2 8 19.44

.2415 -2774 .3084 .3358 .3601 .3820

5:21 5.992 '1. 254 . 251

6.661

0.475347

7.778 8.675
9.055
9.394

a. = + 0.601504 a
a5
=

21.60

.4016
.4192

8.564671

23.76 25 92 2.08 30.24 32.40

.4349 .4489 .461 .4715 .4802

+ 12.426215

9.696
10. 372

9.958 114 lO052L8 10 . 647

a6 = - 4.987703
Wetted Surface Coefficient =
S

.32

.36 .38

34

34.56

36:.2

.4874 .

38 8 41.:04

.4929 .4969 :11993 .9

LD

10.733 10 Q.

-0701 0.7012

.4o
.42

44

43.20

47.52
45.36

,o-.W'5L 197o 10.785

10.390 10.215

1oo0

LorgidLial Centor of Buoyancy =X

46 .48 .54 ".58

9.68 51.84 62.46

64.80 66.96 69.12 71.28

.50 52

.4810 54.00 .4129 56.16 58210.009

.49731 .4878 .4 2

5 1o.536
Model Particulars:

0.4295

9.51377
2.225 .91 8.575 8 .P17 7.441 7.031

Length, ft
Dianmeter, ft H2 Nose radius, ft Tall radius, ft Wetdsra, 3 Volume, ft ft from nose t

9.000
1.800 0.0360 356 12.60

.60 .62 .64 .66

.68

.T0 .72

73.44
75.60

.4271 .4126 .3970 :304 .3t445

0.1800

7.839 73629 U0.07 6.173

5.735 5.290

.74

e 8

77.76 Z .92 -2o08 84.24

86.40 88.56 90. 2 92.;8

0 .82 .84

.86 .88 .90 92 .94

95.04
97.20 101.52

.2655 24 9 .2244 .2040 .1840 .1451

.3255 .3052 .285,

Longitudinal center of buoyancy,

3.866

4.847
4.406 3.134

.1643 .1263 .0869 .0618

.1073

3.974 3.540 2.728

2.318

99.36

1.00

.96 .98

103.68 0.84 o
1 0.00

1.877 1.335
0.000

10.0000

CONFIDENTIAL

7"1

CONFIDENTIAL

Model 4177
X/L 0.00 X in inches Y/D
0.0000

Serial 340501 65-70

Y in inches
0.000

Formula:

.o6

.02 o04

.08 .10 .12 .16 .18

.20

14

.22

2.16 .1132 6.48 8.64 10.80 12.96 15.12 17.28 19.44 21.60 25.9? 2 8.9 o0 30.24 32. 0 34.56 36.72 38 .8
23.76

0.00

.1463
.2115

2.257
3.263

Y6=naix+a 2 x 2 +asxS+a 4 x 4 +a~x5+axe where a, = + 1.000000 a2

=

.24 .26 .28 .30

.2627 3054 .3418 .3729 .3995 .4222 .4413 .4571 .4700 ,4879 .4935 .4973 .4994 .5000 499

4.053 4.712
5.273

5.754

4.041346

6.164
6.514 6.808 7.053 7. 251 7. -407 7. 527 7.614 7.673 732 .705 7.714 7.7o6

a
a5

= -

29.15465o
54.459319

a4 = + 60.478948
-

.450 8

a.=+ 18.o93685 Wetted Surface Coefficien

=

38 .4o

.34 36

SL

.42 .44

41;.o4 43.20 45.36

47.52

.497b .4954
.4923 .4888 .4763 .4y17 .4672

.46 .48
.50

7.680 7.644 7596 7.5 7.414 7.136 6.04

6.517 6. 6.:4
6.490

0.7770
X

4968 51.84
54.oo 56.16 58.32

.4848 .48o6 .4625 .4475 .4355

.4285
.4206

Longitudil Cente

of Buoyancy

7.40I

.54

.52

56 .58 .6o .62

.64

60.48
62.64 64.80 69.12 71.28 73.44
75.60

7.348 7.278 7.209 7063 6.986

= 0.4577 Model Particulars: Length, ft Diameter, ft

66.96

4578 4528

.66 .68
.70

.441;

Nose radius, ft Talr

9.000 1.286

0.0918
0.0184
28.25

.72

:74 v9

77.76
86.40 0

776 2508
.82 .84 .86 .88 88.56

.4116 .903 .3
.39

.4o13

6.351 6.1 6.

Wetted surface, ft 2 Volume, ft3

ai radius, ft

3792

6.005
5.550

Longitudinal center of buoyancy,

ft from nose

7.595 4.119

.90 .92 94 .96

.98
1.00

105.84
105.00

90 .320 92, .88 2974 95.04 .2708 97.20 .2409 99.36 .2073 101.52 .1696 103.68 .1274

?.270 5;
4.178 3.717 3.198 2.61J

.079?
0.0000

1.966 1.222
0.000 CONFIDENTIAL

-t..4":';," S'-:

73

CONFDENTiAL

APPENDIX

TOTATz-BF.STANCE COEFF'ICIENTS DERIVED FROM TESTS OF MODELS OF SERIES 58 AT DEEP SUBMERGENCE PLOTTED AGAINST R&YNOLDS NUMBERS Test Spots are Shown for Each Model Tested With and Without Sand Strips. The Values for Sand Roughness Coefficient and Strut Interference Coefficient are Given-on Each Set of Curves.

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

74

AS 0 0 Lj 0 'IN3131JJ300 R 30NVISIS38 C! 0 C.!

Lift:

A-1 4
Im III

J-1

T
it 1 I 1 0

pol 0
1

fl4- t

441 11 1 11 I I

TTFT

lm Wt
z

t 1 -14,14

AHM
La

mq
A4 , I t Li .I , 41 It

U. w
0

2 IL w 0
U. a

z La

-HER

cli

11

-f4+.
cj

4 [n

LHf 0 Im, r LLII :I IT 111111 13-

H -

zw
2:

-lit r -I! t IH-I+

+ 11-f-F L 4:11-11 1

...

V11 I1 T1.
LId

Affl]

iiufl -ffffl

41

qx
cd

HI
:10I f L ji 1 -1 ITF-1 1-1 d

ft +Effff
Ai + f+i i i 1. T

t + H t Iri-

00
-----------r+H+H4+

H1

CONFIDENTIAL

M7.

"

75

CONFIENTIAL

AS
C,0
--

lN3IOIA.4300
0

30NVISIS319
0

~'t

r.

a4

UJIi IL
rill.
'1111

jIij~I

ow:d

3~
Ij! 11 ! iItiRi

- - ----

-- ---

ox

IDENTIAL CONIII

14..

CONFIDENTIAL

.76

UT :1M
-

IilmlI Will'
IHii

-i
0'

Ii'

:I.

1.7;

Jil

JJriJIIII~j J~fjti~fi~fI

H~~

I01

'I'llII

,=

l~

L;~ti

I JJ
i;'

fl[11jf

IT

I' AftI

L6

i'.. n w Jill

wn

41".

iiII'tI;

wII

PJi1

Ii

tt

ILI

CO~DPrr j;

77

CONFIDENTIAL

AS

.0

'.LN31013:1300

3ONVISIS3H cs0 W

ar --------------z

it 44
T

t3l

. .. .. .
r

"I'll", ::::::: -

L6 cj

fH4#

1+

w 0 0 V) Z

ul -lit w - - __ w "I -LL or

On
FFH
ULU HE HE

up
lit

114

-----....... ....
Ht ra HM T- .. -

---

RMM -1 I:a # 1 2 I r HT-11- q

__rJ

m fHffEIfffl -----fla
A.j:.1

-t

- ... I . 1M RM
r

IT H_

c- Ir

-E2

qX ri

T-T
Nit

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

78

o_

AS 3

LN3I

jJ

JON VIfVSISIN

1ij 1

MAT

LI

CONPIENTLa

79
,AS * 0 N31I01JJ3O

CONFIDENTIAL

3ONV1SIS3H
00

ri 4

--

--

--

-- -C-N--DENT-AL

CONFIDENTIAL

80
IIAS
0~ .0 'IN3101JA13003

0N~j.SjSU

4d

t[ITi~~

'

4cOVIQ
I.- .- F .~ . .F .' .I .. ..

iTli [T

edi~

C3
I-* A-

MT

L
C6

4~t
I

4:-1

tH

II[

CNINTA

81

CONFIDENTIAL

9AS La

0 'INMOIJA300 3ONVISISM 0

Jill I

------

---

+H+

ItV w

tu M= ]HIT !H4T
HR

mm HEEF
- ----LLI LL iqT. IIL+: _#I_ I Eta.

Tx

U 4R: On-

C6

I.. I. .

1+

0
Ul la LL w

M10

- H+

................

+f

1,4
-+4 44+

1 0 Q! T: T Mm
m

w go

m ... ...

t ......... Tf X I - m : ::: z LLI

-------------

M, T w

X M (o d qx

##11.-

TH :-.

J T T 0: 0 0d:

d:

::L ::i
T M

_T: IT-

::Fx T: ll-

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

82

__11"1~

31013-,101

31GNIVISIS313

I,~

Bra

$1 I I fj

-til

I'

0I'

F[T

CONFIiENTIAL

83

CONFIDENTIAL

,AS .

2~

*"

.N311AA3OO

30NWJ.SIS3)i

T
-IT

11
--. ---

--TT ---

4: -

-7"

------------

soo
ff ( Li
J,+[+-F +4+

tHT1 ILL

- I-N_ I'll
EH

_A+

E4

CONFIDENTIAL

-H

'IN3101A.3OO

30NV1Sjg3U

"CL

144

U)

C!

fn

CONPI~rmD

85

CONFIDENTIAL

AS x 0 u

. 0

'l.N31314A300

30NV.LSIS3tj

d
HAiff
4.

1H+H-H
_-T

+t+ X

T i r i[JAR 1ill R M
T

-TT _FF7

tz

. .. . . . ###R TER ---tV_ Eff

0 o It

T: .1-

:mmm_:

tt4#
+H++ m:X sm a. --':7

TF
------

------------

"TIM M19
IT

tit
m AH H. jogIto agg 40 Hof +H+[+ at 2:: T ........ m: -- -

....... ...........H H
f+FFf++H44+H44444-

-----k - Jififlf I T A ruff 1 4.. p T1 1: XXXM ............. N2 SX z

T :44444 _T: 1010

T -+HI+H

+ ------- - T

0 Mmmaaxxxf 'o

M: T a ff-4-1 -- - -- T -- ---- - ---:-H4HB ox

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

86

!:

0 0

.LN3101.13OO

3()NVISIS311 q00

-F

---

----

IF
+H+i

CONFID4-T-T

87
3AS~

CONFIDENTIAL

o o
0AH

0 'iN3I013.D0

3ONVLIS93 FlI(

II

H-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
111-t1111

jtlR

~iII1tltlilI-~l~i
ff 1 t

r"

+W+ AII HF

04

p-a

HAi ~l-H +H~ff~' H 1I

____4

f _
TJ4

.. ..

II I5-.1

ff4:
1-HilleA+ +0

Pd
4--0-4

44

25CONFIDENT-AL

CONFIDENTIAL
3,

88
o

~D
0

*gAS 'N3101A.43O 3ONV.LSIS38

44
It 0

+1-H

+I

zz

cIL

-#41

:-

I --R

44

I4~

it

CONIDETIA

89

CONFIDENTIAL

IAS

.0

'IN3101AA00

33NIVISISMi

41f 4

----

t i. I -- I : ---------- ...
E ----------: -----=111-, li jT - -----0

IN

- - ----------- ---------- --:::

-----

-- T ----------- -

-- ---- -----

-----001 . I....... --------- rtT

OF ---- -------IA

0 0

---It

---------3: --- ------------- -----.......... ... 40 --- --La IL c'j --- ---------------------- ---------I -- ------------

------ Tt ----T
--Tf t

T p:

F 4-4+

us

T------------------ -------- w
...........

A LU T
T

C-4

R - -------- ---- -------- -------------------------------- -----------------------------M ------ ------ -------------------

-1+H+

10 z Ul

.... --------tT

.......... C4

---------------------+: -------

qx

T ------ -------------- --

Mfl-

ld

---------------------- -- ------------+H+

40 QX

XT

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

90

'0 WO~

NIIflOBNII3

- -----

tf

IMI
L2

TTT
z

I+
4-

CONFIDENTIAL

91

CONFIDENTIAL

AS

0 'INTOIJ3300

30NVISIS31i

TT T -----

!III!!! 4+MT AH M +f+ Utit -j

+H. . . .......... fifflHT-77 IT ++1 4:T-4in -- -------M .... ........ 0 us': 1 0

cot tAd1+14+H Hill +1 +1 H!

---------

------X T M 4+11 1 --m

. m

-------- +f------1. z . I ! II m
0 z

m .......... T.

w 1 'PTF I 1

------d"l-T xttt --- t:: _- U-:

+F.

a ---------+H+ -....

X.
M!

........

16

--- T: -1-

--- -..... m

-------- --------

w w
96

ty

+H

44-J` :IF -+++-4+-

ffl+ +FF

H++ -+H-I I H+f+ -+H4 Hff

------

W --------M . ... ....... I I... 11ij ............ . ....... w

T Vw - A#

------

+H

:H-l II+

---- ---- -- - -:--4 If+ M.

---- ------

m
_444

H+Hi 1

m ------------

M ............. ... + m --------TIMM: .......... T : M, T

Qx

X . ........ --------I

-----m ....... T: ----------

: 1 irm: mqr: m E I fT 0 IIA T --- -------......

... M m

Tmm -------

ic

CONFIDENTIAL

~A
CONFIDENTIAL

-___

__

___

___

___

___

___

___

___

___

___92_

'0

1NN3101AAflO 30NVISIS38
C! 0

--- -*

M41
-! 1 1H t

it

..

r7-r

e
------

toI

V4
-+Mfl

4+t+F
-- --m

--

+
jo - -- --

90

.0 .

----

--- --

.G1

4T=

CONFIDENTIAL

93
.AS La-

CONFIDENTIAL

.0

'N3IO1ii300

3ONV.LSISU& .. . .. . .. . . .. . . ...

.. .. . .

. .......

+ -+14d

.. .........

..

.. ......
. . . . . . . .. . .

....

+H-Ha

'- 'Il

4.... ....

.. ... 111LEE

...
- ----

- - - - - - - --

---------

:4

------

--

co

---

CONF----TIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

94

AS
0 e, x 0 cl 1300 30NVISIS3U 0

93 HL ... ...... . Hij---- - ---+ - --------- --

L;j . . ---- ------ ---- -- ---1:111 U 0 0 ----0

It

-----w t-1

-pal I Ilt 444+

7 T --------

_:ta
III L6 LU

---------------

--------------

------ - -------mm ----- -----------

LI, xv

------

LMq

IiHff
!if!! II -------------------- --------...... ....... .. ------- ...... . -4f----------TT T # -------------H

Iff,
41"

cc

0 1
T Z ul

------------- ------

0 T -:r: T-T --4444-

--tit EMU

0 -- -- ------------------ ----------T..... H Tri

+

. .

T M.

cy

CONFIDENTIAL

95

CONFIDENTIAL

s
'CA

'IN31013300

30NVISIS38

. ... ........... ... . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . .. .

. . . .. . . .

fl0

-11

-H -

------

O--I-ENT-A-

CONFIDENTIAL

96

&AS 10 x
+H - - +i+H+H+

'IN3101JA300

30NVISIS38

q cu

TE __+
--+++F HHH #t #4#
. .. .. -----------

R4-

-R+ -+H If -H+ -+ 44+H111111 111 4+

Mm

4f 44, 0 wj os

.. .I --- -

it

--------- ------- ------------ ---------------- ----0- t --- . . ...

CA

B4 C-i - ------- C4 lu LL. lK M w 1Hj

LL

-4 +1+

- --- --H
T

1+ 444 ------+

.1

---- ------- ------- --4 -4 -----------

+
4444-,W z ... ---- -------

44+ -A- + --

4- ALL
4

00
Jft __rr 4-1-11-

0.

4+41j- -

o'! I. "H

Iil H !+ ... ......... .... .......

M.

---

....... ...... 2x

:t

CONME)ENTIAL

497
.AS3
'0 'N1N0i.iJno 3OINV913U

CONFIDENTIAL

II

U~

ML

CONFIDENTIAL

i.~

S.

99

CONFIDENTIAL

APPENDIX 4 RESIDUAL-RESISTAN~CE COEFFICIENT CURVES USED TO D~ETEMINE THE STRUT CORRECTION COEFFICIENTS The Strut Interference Correction is Obtained by Deducting the Coefficients for the Model with DuWmn-Strut Supporting Frame Alone In Place from the Coefficients for the Model with the

Dummy Struts Inserted.

CONFIDENTIAL

aDa

o
0?0

o0
Q~

0
0
0

W-

a-J

0n0I

0000

06

oS o
CONFIDENTIALo

90l
0LlS8-vnl3

I30-A0

101

CONFIDENTIAL

0*

To 1
(a W

J. f
...

0
-0

01

'9

'
0

o10
00-

co

00

T at

InT

In
IA
A_ .
-

inl3 S

IN3IO-A300 3ONViISI-S31v-I

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

102

MODEL 4175
WITH: 1.0

DUMMY STRUT-'" . r

2 r- .: _ . .

-WITH

SUPPORTING FRAME ONLY

.cn
WI

.0

30

.40

.50

.60

.70

.80

.90

1.0

I-I

Lh. L-

w S 1'".5

MODEL

4176

w
Z

II
.1o .20 .30 .40 .50 .60 .7O .80 .90 1.0

a wJ

MODEL 4177 1.5

Sio.. -.-

-.

0.o.. -

-."f-0.

---

0.5.

.10

.20

.30

.40

.50

.60 -

.70

.80

.90

1.0

FROUDE NUMBER,

CONFIDENTIAL

'N

Ii

103

CONFIDENTIAL

APPENDIX 5

NET RESIDUAL-RESISTANCE COEFFICIENTS FOR DEEP SU3AERGENCE PLOTTED AGAINST FROUDE NUMBER
The Net Residual-Resistance Coefficients are Obtained by Deducting the Sand Roughness Coefficient and Strut Interference Coefficient from the Gross Residual-Resistance Coefficient Obtained from Tests of the Model with the Sand Strip but Without the Duimy Strut or Supporting Strut in Place.

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

104IJ

4:
0, &A 0.6 f? 0.0 0.9 1.0 l

-- tMO3gL

4164 4.144

~I~hET(
a 99 t4 I$

k
. MOa I 4

.
.

.0 U

0.4

as

066

0.?

Uk

06#4

1.

Ll

43

1.4

1.$

IA

1.7

JL.

L LI I 01 06

LU

0.4

a. ?

U OA7

0.3

IA

14 1., 44,

--- .0 1..?

CONF-IDENTIALDL

196]!

105

CONFIDENTIAL

~0 0.2 ~~ 07 ~

08

09

03 1.0.

3 .

~
.

0.2

03

0.4

Q,5

OA

067

0.8

0.

LI

L2

Ls

1.4

LIS

LI;

L .

1.01 lea

062

0.3

0.

05

OA

0.7

0.6

0.5

1.0

L2

1.3

1.4

1.S

Le

L.?

i t I

COFDETA

CONFIDENTIAL

1ob

1-1MODEL

4166

JI

c 01

0.4

0$0

ale

0.?

OA6

0$9

U)0

IA

1.3

164

usi

fox Ir

08

02

0.4

as6

.?

0$e

0.6

LO

LI

1.2

LS

t4

Li5

L.6

1.7

P2.00 j Vr

NUMER

CONFIDENTIA

107

CONFIDENTIAL

-03

83

0,A

06

04

0.?

0.3

0.6

IA

Le3

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

--

Li-

Fl1

1..

0.2

0.

0.4

0as

069

0.?

0.3

0.0

w.

1.9

1.4

US

1.7

3
10d-

_ __.03

0.1 0.3 0.4

01

.6

0?.8

0.6.

13 14 L . [Z{ZaI.z0zURI~
IC 15 ~ ~ S

mTC

0.5

~
ml

~I8
-110

IO

10.3

7 -K-.L

L- T--

OL43

AEI

03 0

04

640

0.

0.

0.0

'.O

'.3

'.

1.4$

1.5

1.$

1I Id

.... ...

ER

V/Ox

LON41 ETIA

109

CONFIDENTIAL

APPENDIX 6
TOTAL BARE HULL EFPECTIVE HORSEPOWER VERSUS VOLUME AT VARIOUS EVEN SPEEDS FOR PROTOTYPES OF SERIES 58
OPERATING AT DEEP SUBMERGENCE, The EHP's Have Been Calculated using the Net Cr for Deep Submergence and a Roughness Allowance Coefficient of 0.4L x 10-s for

Standard. Conditions of Salt Water at 59 F. Volume is Also Shown.

A Curve of Length Versus

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

110

Olipioo006emnt In Tons 10DO 1200 140 11600 20.00 32 3400 2

2

Sj

I-

ktII 1--1

-tBI

t~

MODEL 4154

puI

Vialum-

In

tes

CON0

001

0I0ENTIAL.0

11

CONFIDENTIAL

Displacement In. Tons IT 140 1900 90)o 220 2400 2 2800

240 a4

__7 800

~C1
J=a

re,

Vogai

ee

-4bi

- 4O41

LILL

DE

CONFIDENTIAL

112

Dleplocomont 6 000 120 1400 1600

In 1800

Tons 200 2200 24 2600 2600

i+

-44-41

T-w

In

VEum

In Cui

Fe

E 0640 CilL50oo09

113

CONFIDENTIAL

Displacement fi Or 00C
20 1600 I

In Tons 20O 2200

240

2600

2300

~ -~~$-

000

,
MOE

L
415 4Li I
LH.

&

7=.

.ga

-4L44

.440

no

jj
1500 -

3000 IN00

00

WOCO VoueIJCbcFe

00

00

CO

000c 40C

3000
CONIDETIA

CONFIDENTIAL

114

D11PIUCament In TORS
0)0 low 1 1400

pc PC
000

M ... . I II , itIt I ..
::### 240 M001L 41" 7-

RF cp
OAO 0.50 0.10

220

0
+1 +

. .. . . .... . .

7000

411 I'I'l I too -+Hj+ 4-H-f+

F too +H+ 3 -Kftots -'[-F++

4+4

. ..

6000

- ------L

1 -1 II1- 11r LA

5000
LU 4000

r ISC 4-k21 1;

J-4-i- - -1 -1 !40 +f+

-' 4. 14 -T

---

11

'IT

22--

-4= 2000

Ito

MCI 14 12

.4 1

1000

20000

30000

40WO

PODW Volume

fooloo

?0000

1110000

In Cuble Feet

CONFIDENTIAL

115

CONFIDENTIAL

Disploaemenl I 0 1900 1400O 160

In Tons I0) 2000 220 2400 tow 60

900

-T

-H-

2-i

400

VolumFI

In

Iu~

9C40

IDE

7000

116

CONFIDENTIAL

Displacement
100 200 00 1600

In Tons
200 2200 2 2600 21100

0.36

0,50

0.10

0.65

7,.0

ISO

Itos

Volume in Ouble Feet

CONFIDENTIAL

CONM~ENTIAL

117

Displacement 6 S 0 1000 1200 1400 16 0 14 0

In Tons 200 220 2400 2600 2800

044

050 -tilt 010

06570

L{

lh1

fi

000

44-F

~
F,

00

240

MOE 4161 140

L_ -I-E

1p

111000

I7

-ji~t

rrl~r=

GP

Volum

in

rui

CONFFENTIA

CONFIDENTIAL18

Displacement
60 a( 000 D 1200 140 ltO

In Tons
200)0 11100 2400 20 2600

14100

60

9000

ST

IIII

-hJ

-H

+1L

-30

no

2000

3000 6000 000

6000

7000

20

000

0000

Volumeitt

Cu150Fee

COFIE

IL

V.

119

CONFIDENTIAL

0Ispleooment 600 600 1000 1900 1400 1600

in Tons low 2000 2200 9400 260 30

TF

5000

20000

Q000Q 40100

:FITENIA

CONFIDENTIAL

120

Displacameni In Tcnenidnta a Boo 1000 1200 1400 1600 SO 00 2200 2400 2o 9

260

9--000

-TT!11

CMODELE41IAL

121

CONFIDENTIAL

Displacement 600 S00 10) 12U0 ADD 1600

In Tons 1110 2000 220 2400 2600

Confidential
2600

..

00

CONDELE4TIA

CONFIDENTIAL

122

Displaeement In lens

$000

a00g00o400

00

00

7000000

0O

VI um

In CuiTP

toNFo

NTA

123

CONFIDENTIAL

Displacement

In Tons

400

00

26

I-

Ii-7

900

~~

30

IIifli

r.V

ma.

SpTo

900

7001

VA- m

inCbcVs

ISONFHDENTIA

CONFIDENTIAL

124

Displacement G00 Soo 1000 11100 1400 1600

in Tons [S00 200 2200 11400 2600

Confidentilo 2800

MODE 41L

F,..

ISOI

CONFID

NT5000

125

CONFIDENTIAL

1000 00

0Iplocamsftt

In

Tons

a 0j4
2 22f

1WO 1
cp

1 4

00

*
24

F__I

8000

MODELDE416A

CONFIDENTIAL

126

Displacement In Tons 6 10 00 10 1400 1600 1800 2000 22 0 24 20

Confildntlql 28 0

24

00

In

Vo2um

Cu,~ Fee

7000en~a

..

CONFIENTIL

127

CONFIDENTIAL

0loplacement In Tons
600 Bo0 10011 1200 1400 1600 [Boo 2000 2200 2400 2600 26000

240

.0

0007.

MODEL

417

L~

2000

4000

5000000

700 Ivl Ies

Volume it

CINOIENTIA

a"-

CONFIDENTIAL

128

Displacement S00 S00 1000 1200 1400 1600

In Tons 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 29000

00

TI
2- 0

F
600

2000 $00

...
140:__

..

< ... ,
It

-4

-40.0 264

140Vo-

1-1-

300

eiHCbcPs

II

CONFIDENTIAL

129

CONFIDENTIAL

Displacement In Tons
6 a80 000D 120 400 1 600o 1800 2000 2200 240 2 00

~~~ I
240.

1111?
' 0.65 7.00
-70

4~~

LIJ_

-J F-'-

1 0

_-00
Tg

220

'CPs

40 ..090

e*
0.1

0.0

Ti.

-.

4000

2000

3000 U000

4000 6000

?000

6000

10000000

4ouei

ui

~e

Ito

CO2DETA

200

CONFIDENTIAL

130

Displacement In Tons
600 S0X 1000 1200 1400 1600 11100 92000 2200 2400 ge0m 60

ago-

u--

___
6000 4000 5000
2000 6000 0000

7
3000 6000 0F0

1
".

ICu II I ]out.

F:

CONFIDENTIAL,4

KT
I

131

CONFIDENTIAL

OlaPIoCtmant

In Tons 2000 9200 2400 260 23000

Goo G

oo oo N

10

400

M0W

1900

_4

1110

C40
-177

03-I
,i -:

90

500

2000 000 000

00

600

700 Volumein Fee Cubc

300

600

000

CONOI

40TIA

CONFIDENTIAL

132

Displacement Or OW0 100 1200 1400 1600

In Tons 2000 2200 2400 2600 2000

360

noL

01

ASiC

000.@

+II
CONOIELNTIAL

133

CONFIDEN v1AL

Displacemient In Tons Go00 o 100 1009

0

w000 000

0O

31 0

400

"6M60

1000

600

00

? 0 0

0 00

00

9000000

CONFIDEN17A

135

CONFIDENTIAL

APPENDIX

NET RESIDUAL-RESISTANCE COEFFICIENTS FOR SNORKELLING DEPTHS PLOTTED AGAINST FROUDE NUMBER

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL
im ZA S -___ = t x

13~6
N3If3O 0 NWSS'1lOSd

0*

'7'

-4

1114 T ---+hi .
f I
-- :-T T-TT-440

------- -----

4.

137

CONFIDENTIAL

`4

J.LN310144300 30NVI.SIS36--vflOIS38

C-i'

-4441CON1IDENTIAL

138

ZA S

"D "IN3IOI.A3O

30NV1S1S38--vnaCS38

-- ----- -- - -- W C -

1-

IVII

I~~

If

I I I lu

139
.o tjc Afl

A0 a~~~~~~HJSOSO

$Vif-1AI
-4:

44
1

T-

- - -- -

T --

T --- -- - ----

T.

Hitf -------

-x-F+ TT M HEEFF :XT

- ---- 4 4+ - ----

ttt

A.

d
-4A VY1PO1eC.W11I

Mimi

C o RNTRL AID DOCUM10N

WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCCE BASE

FROM ANY- LITIGATION WHICH MAY iNSWl *WHICH MAY RE INVOLVED.

WWI-U-

tOM ANY

_____q7

CAOO

CONTROL NO:

US CLASSIFICATION:

OA NO:

JTLE:

RIGINATING

AGENCY:

REIGN TITLES:

AD-A800 14TRANSLATION NO:

RANSLATED

BY:&7/75,te2~t'

li49VIOUSLY CATALOGED'AS:

SCT...9 4 . AUTH: DOD DIR,52OO.10, 29 June 60

(d~'. /09