COEFFICIENT CONSTANT AND OTHER COEFFICENTS VARIED. 5 



larger and more important than that presented by any other investigators except William 

 Fronde and his son. 



I do not feel that any discussion which can ibe given here from the floor will add to the 

 importance of the work which is presented, and I am sure that we shall receive it in the 

 same way we have other work as presented from time to time, and shall give it the greatest 

 appreciation, namely, that we shall continue to use it for a long time to come. 



Prof. H. C. Sadler, Member of Council: — I regret that as I only returned from Lon- 

 don last night I have not had time to really examine Mr. Taylor's paper very carefully, but I 

 have had occasion to do some work in shallow water, and I may say that the results I have 

 obtained confirm those of Mr. Taylor. When we get to very shallow-water work, the flow 

 around the model is, of course, approaching that of two dimensional flow, instead of three, 

 and it always seemed to me that that is the possible explanation vfhy we sometimes find 

 the finer vessels harder to drive in shallow water than the fuller ones. In the models shown 

 by Mr. Taylor the fine vessel is broader and deeper than the full vessel. If the flows take 

 place as he mentions, the wider and deeper vessel, even though of a finer form, might possi- 

 bly have the larger stream-line resistance. 



In testing some barges a year and a half ago, I found some confirmation of that. A 

 barge of fine form, when loaded to the same displacement as one of a fuller form, drove 

 harder, and it seemed to me that the explanation was that the full vessel had more water be- 

 tween her bottom and the false bottom than the finer one, and there seems to be less oppor- 

 tunity for the water to flow in three dimensions in the latter case. Perhaps that is some 

 confirmation of the results obtained by Mr. Taylor. 



I am sure we are all deeply indebted to him for this additional information, and on read- 

 ing the paper more carefully, if any other point occurs to me, I will communicate it in writ- 

 ing later. 



Mr. Steven.son Taylor, Past President: — Only those who have made similar experi- 

 ments to those described can properly discuss this paper. 



The charts show clearly the results obtained by Constructor Taylor and they are very in- 

 teresting. They are especially so to me because I have particularly followed the building of 

 one class of steamers — those for Long Island Sound service — for many years. 



One of the models, sixty per cent block coefficient and ninety-eight per cent midship 

 coefficient, corresponds very closely to the model of the old Fall River Line steamers 

 Bristol and Providence, constructed of wood in 1866 by the late William H. Webb. These 

 steamers represented in style and construction the greatest advance at one step made before 

 their time. The dead rise at midship section of these steamers was only three inches in a 

 half-breadth of twenty-four feet. Their lines have been closely followed in the construction 

 of similar steamers built since their time. The model to which I have referred shows on the 

 chart most satisfactorily for both deep and shallow water. Only those with a greater mid- 

 ship coefficient — something not thought of while vessels were mostly constructed of wood — 

 exceed it in efficiency. 



On behalf of the Society I thank Mr. Taylor for his exceedingly interesting paper, 

 which shows so graphically the important results of his experiments. 



Naval Constructor Joseph H. Linnard, Member of Council: — I have been very 

 much interested in this paper, and what I wish to say is more in the nature of an inquiry than 



