Test 

 Number 



Object 

 Type 



Coefficients 



Correlation 

 Coefficients 



A 



B 



C 



D 



PTl 



Corer 



-2.39 



-0.004 



0.89 



0.05 



.82 



PT2 



Corer 



-3.37 



0.06 



0.35 



-0.04 



.95 



PT3 



Cone 



-3.35 



-0.01 



2.75 



0.18 



.98 



PT4 



Cone 



2.67 



0.02 



1.85 



0.12 



.99 



PT5 



Cone 



0.56 



-0.04 



2.43 



0.13 



.97 



PT6 



Corer 



-1.94 



0.05 



0.61 



0.04 



.96 



PT7 



Corer 



-0.58 



0.05 



2.27 



-0.14 



.99 



PT9 



Cone 



-1.94 



0.09 



1.40 



0.10 



.98 



PTll 



Corer 



-1.36 



0.02 



0.65 



0.02 



.98 



PT12 



Corer 



-0.98 



-0.02 



1.14 



0.06 



.98 



Since Equation 9 represented the test data (with a slightly higher 

 correlation than Equation 8) , it was the final form to be tested in 

 a regression analysis. 



In Equation 9, as in Equations 3 through 8, all the force terms 

 were selected by predicting the form of pertinent forces acting on 

 the object as it penetrates. Equation 9 most accurately correlates 

 to the actual test data, and its form represents the penetration 

 phenomena for this series of tests. However, it is evident that some 

 discrepancy exists in the assigned coefficients of the equation. 

 Similar tests should have similar coefficient values, but they are 

 different. The conclusion is that this regression analysis has only 

 supplied a possible forro of the force equation. A somewhat modified 

 approach would be necessary in order to achieve a usable penetration 

 equation, and this was pursued, as described in the following sections. 



Physical Analysis 



As discussed above in the BACKGROUND section, most of the 

 existing penetration prediction techniques are not applicable to the 

 case of seafloor penetration. The techniques of Schmid-* may be 

 applicable to the idealized situations considered but require considerable 



11 



