actually involve the thickness-to-chord ratio, (3) g 
parla? S| sin 9 + © sin? 9 (24) 
fs (0.386 - 0.303% eos “es (0.055 ~ 0.020 =) cos? @ (25) 
For a thickness-to-chord ratio of 1/4 these expressions 
reduce to 
EF = 0.75 sin 9 + 0.25 sin® 9 (24a) 
g 2 
R = 0.31 cos 9 - 0.05 cos* 9g. (25a) 
Pocuaiiy there appelite to be only a small difference in the 
two expressions for E and the simpler one used by Eames is 
probably acceptable. There is, however, a serious difference 
in the two expressions for a, Whicker's values being only 
about 1/3 of those given by Eames. Since the relationship 
given by Whicker is based on some actual data it is likely 
that it is much closer to the actual case, and use of Eames' 
expression would probably result in an overestimate of the 
xesulting tension. Nevertheless, there is a compelling argu- 
ment for using the relation suggested by Eames in that he has 
tabulated the resulting evaluation of the integral functions 
for the cable configuration. Tables computed with the re- 
lation proposed by Whicker are not available, although it is 
22 
