Since these cables are trailing at a constant angle for each speed, each 

 experimental data point yields a set of hydrodynamic loading data points which 

 can be compared with the functions (or coefficients) developed earlier. Con- 

 sidering the normal components of force first, in a critical angle tow the 

 normal component of hydrodynamic force balances the cable weight component normal 

 to the cable axis. Thus 



(f ) . «R = wcos<j> 

 n d> c 



c 



(1A) 



from which 



(f ). tepV^d) 



n q> 



(2A) 



where cf> is the critical angle. 



Applying the normal hydrodynamic loading function presented in equation (4) , 

 were computed for 

 presented in Table A. 2, 



C 's were computed for the two models from the data shown in Figure A. 2 and are 

 R 



TABLE A. 2 - DERIVED NORMAL DRAG COEFFICIENTS 



Speed 

 (kt) 



Reynolds 

 Number 



Model A 



Model B 



A 



C R 



*c 



C R 



*c 



C R 



6 



5.9 x 10 4 



15° 



1.28 



9° 



2.56 



1.31 



9 



8.86 x 10 4 



10° 



0.99 



5.8° 



1.97 



1.15 



12 



1.17 x 10 5 



6.5° 



0.96 



4° 



1.71 



1.03 



15 



1.477 x 10 5 



4.5° 



0.96 



2.5° 



1.86 



0.94 



Also shown in Table A. 2 is a column designated C„ . These values of C,, were 



K K 



computed by equation (6) for the corresponding Reynolds number in Table A. 2. It 



■k 



is seen that C and C for Model A agree rather well. It is concluded that the 

 R R 



representation of the normal hydrodynamic force developed in the body of the report 

 is also a good representation for Model A. This is in spite of the fact that 

 Model A has only 50% of the ribbon cable coverage. The reason may be that the data 

 base is comprised largely of shallow angle data. It has been observed that at 



24 



