A Six Degree of FreedomModel for a Submersible

1. Introduction
The primary aimof the study group was to identify alternative approaches or im-
provements to the existing method of predicting submarine motion. A secondary problem
of interest was that of roll instability when asubmarine has recently surfaced. This lat-
ter situation results from a large amount of water under the casing which takes some
considerable time to drain away.
Oneoption currently beingconsidered intheMOD for themain problemof submarine
motion isavortex lift-linemodel. It wasgenerally thought that this avenuewouldbeworth
pursuing but due to security restrictions, little information was available and sono work
was done on this system.
The present model usesthe general equations of rigid body motion resolvedalongaxes
fixed in the submarine with the external forces and moments left as unknown functions
(see Appendix). The 6degrees of freedom are then the 3linear plus 3angular velocity
components. Thegeneral equations arelinearized byconsidering small perturbations about
steady forward motion and the partial derivatives for the unknown forces and moments
are evaluated using experimental and computational fluid dynamics techniques.
Our main efforts wereconcentrated onsuggesting improvements to the current linear
model whichisinaccurate whenthesubmarine undergoes rapid changes indirection. Then
neglected nonlinear terms becomeimportant and an ad hoc systemfor adding these inhas
been developed. A morerigorous approach requires areturn tothegeneral equations anda
better understanding of thefluiddynamical effectsand their resulting forces and moments
acting onthe submarine. Various types of fluideffectswerediscussed, including buoyancy,
fluid inertia ("added mass"), viscous drag on the hull due to skin friction, lift forces on
the rudder, hydroplanes, and conning tower and viscous and history effects due to vortex
shedding, and where possible analytical expressions weregiven.
Once a more complete model for the submarine plus the fluid has been obtained, it
may then bepossibleto simplifyit usingperturbation methods, but it will almost certainly
require numerical techniques to beof practical use.
2. Submersible Coordinates
There appears to be someinconsistency in the notation used as in the list of control
notation provided by the MOD, XG, YG, ZG are given as the body axes with Ix, Iy and
Iz the moments of inertia about these axes, whereas in the general equations of motion
XG, YG, ZG are the coordinates of the centre of gravity. Wealso note that the products
of inertia are the negative of the normal definitions. The general equations of motion are
derived in the Appendix. Weshall usethe followingnotation (seeFigures la, lb):-
X,Y,Z
Ix,Iy,Iz
Ixy, Iyz, i.;
< / > , f), 1/;
body axes
moments of inertia about x, y, z-axes
products of inertia about z,y, z-axes
roll, pitch, yawangles (Figure 1b) .
linear velocity components
angular velocities (~, 8,~)
force components
moment components
u,v,w
p , q , r
X,Y,Z
K,M,N
1
Xg,Yg,Zg
xs, Yb, Zb
8B,8S,8R
F
N
n
g
density of water
mass of submarine
volume of submarine
length of submarine
centre of gravity
centre of buoyancy
coordinates of G
coordinates of B
bowplane, stern plane, rudder deflection angles
forcevector (X, Y, Z)
moment vector (K,M,N)
angular velocity vector (p, q, r)
gravitational force.
p
m
V
L
G
B
Other symbols are defined wherethey ariseinthe text.
3. Gravitational and Buoyancy Effects
The total forceonthe submarine fromthe gravitational and buoyancy effects isgiven
by
F =mg-pVg, (3.1)
where mis the mass of the submarine, p is the density of water and V is the volume of
water displaced (the volume of the submarine). If wedefine r9 to be the position of the
centre of gravity and rbto be the position of the centre of buoyancy in sub-coordinates,
then the moment Nabout the origin isgivenby
N=mr9 xg- pVrb x g. (3.2)
A problemarises whentrying toresolveginthe sub-coordinates for ageneral position
of the submarine usingthe angles < j J , 8, ' l j J . Wenotethat there isnot aunique decomposition
sincearoll of 90
0
followedby apitch of anglea isequivalent to ayawof angle a followed
by a roll of 90
0
so that the order of the rotations is important. (In fact only two angles
arenecessary to definethe position, cf. spherical polar coordinates.)
A transformation can be written down for each of the pitch, roll and yaw motions
respectively
- Sin8)
o x' ,
cos8
(3.3)
o
cos< j J
- sin< j J
Si~<jJ) x',
c o s < j J
(3.4)
(
c o s ' l j J sin'ljJ
x = - sin'ljJ c o s ' l j J
o 0
(3.5)
2
where xisinthe sub-frame and x' inthe rotated axes. Thus if z' isvertically downwards
sothat g=(0,0, g) inthe primed axes, then it isgivenby
g=(g s~n4 ,
9 cos4 >
(
-gSin8) (0)
g= , g= 0 ,
gcos8 9
(3.6)
in the sub-axes for the 3cases. As matrix multiplication is not commutative, the order
of the rotations matters as already stated. However, if welinearize the rotation matrices
by replacing the cos terms by 1 and the sin terms by their argument, weobtain near
identity matrices. Then neglecting the product of angles, the order of multiplication does
not matter and weobtain the composite transformation
1j;
1
- 4 >
-8)
r x'.
(3.7)
Thus again taking g=(0,0, g) in the primed axes, wecan approximate gby
(3.8)
in the sub-frame of reference.
For aneutrally buoyant submarine,
m=pV, (3.9)
and sothere isnolinear forcefrom(3.1), but there isstill aturning moment givenby (3.2).
Weassume that the y-components of both r9 and rbcan beneglected sowecan write
(3.10)
Noweliminating pV from(3.2) using the neutral buoyancy condition (3.9), wefind
(3.11)
Then a substitution for rg, rband g from(3.8) and (3.10) showsthat the moment of the
gravitational and buoyancy forces can beapproximated for small roll and pitch angles by
N=-mg( Zg - z,) ( ~) - mg( x 9 - x,) ( J ~ ).
(3.12)
Wenote that the submarine will not maintain level uniformmotion unless
(3.13)
3
as otherwise there isalargepitching moment. Werequire astable state to linearize about
soweassume that equation (3.13) holds and weare then left with
N=-mg( z, - z,) (~) .
(3.14)
This agrees with the terms given in the linearized equations as Zg - Zb =RGv (i.e. the
vertical separation of R and G).
4. Added Mass and Inertia
When abody isaccelerating influidwhichwasinitially at rest, added mass and inertia
terms arise. For abody translating with speed U(t) through anirrotationalliquid with no
circulation around the body then
DU= dT
dt '
(4.1)
where D isthe drag and T(t) isthetotal kinetic energy of thefluid. This equation canbe
used to calculate the drag, but it breaks downif there is separation of the flowand in a
viscous fluidwhere energy isdissipated. For asphere the drag is !pV~ ~ , where pV isthe
mass of fluid displaced and for acylinder moving perpendicular to its axis, D =pV~ ~ .
Therefore, wehave arelation of theform
(4.2)
where M isamass tensor of secondorder and the time derivative of U isthe acceleration
inan inertial frame (Batchelor 1967p.407). For arotating body,
(
dU) =U+nx U,
dt in
(4.3)
where '.' is the time derivative in sub-coordinates and {}is the angular velocity of the
submarine (seeAppendix).
Assuming that equation (4.2) can still be applied with small rotation, and that the
main components of the mass tensor areonthe diagonal then wehave
o
(4.4)
and sowith rotation,
(
m1(U +qw - rv )
F=- m2(v+ru-pw) .
m3(w +pv - uq)
Wecan make the further approximation of the velocity of the submarine being primarily
in the forward direction, and set
(4.5)
u=Uo+u', v =v',
, , , ,
W=W, p=p, q=q, r=r (4.6)
4
where the primes denote small quantities. Then just retaining the linear terms in the
perturbations (and dropping the primes), the drag termcanbesimplifiedto
(4.7)
Similarly, for the moments wecanwrite
d
N =--(10)
d t '
(4.8)
where Iis an inertia tensor and this couldbeapproximated inthe first instance by
(4.9)
where 11, I2' I3 are the added moments of inertia about the sub-axes due to the fluid
motion.
5. Viscous Drag
In ahigh Reynolds number flowproduced by abody moving steadily through fluid
at rest at infinity, there is irrotational flowoutside the boundary layer and wakeif no
separation occurs. Then the total friction drag on the body in translational motion is
givenby (Batchelor 1967p.335)
(5.1)
where U is the velocity, aisameasure of the body surface, k is anumber depending on
the body shape and R =UL] istheReynolds number with L anappropriate length-scale
and v the viscosity of water. Thus, weexpect the drag to take the form
1
F=-AUIUI~, (5.2)
where A is a second order tensor and for small departures from the state of uniform
translation using (4.6), wecanapproximate this by
(5.3)
The largest term in the drag force is balanced by the engine thrust which acts in the
positive x-direction.
6. Forces on the Rudder
The rudder acts as an aerofoil and provided its angle of attack with the flowis not
too large, then wecanuseclassical aerofoil theory. Therefore, wehavenodragforceinthe
5
direction of the flow, but alift forceexists perpendicular to the velocity. Wesuppose that
the submarine istranslating with velocity Uo inthe x-direction and isnot rotating. Then
the effect of turning therudder through anangleo R isto produce alift forceof magnitude
-puor inthe y-direction, where I' isthe circulation around the aerofoil. For athin plate
of length I or anarrow Joukowski aerofoil, the circulation isgivenby
r=-471-Uol sin8R, (6.1)
per unit length of aerofoil for flowat an angle 8R (Acheson 1990, p.121). Thus the total
instantaneous lift produced is47rpARUg sin8R inthe y-direction, where AR is the surface
area of the rudder. For small deflections, sin8R can beapproximated by 8R to give
(6.2)
The upper and lower rudders areof different sizeand wedefine~AR to bethe difference
in their surface areas. Thus the centre of lift has asignificant z-coordinate, ZR, as well an
x-coordinate, XR. This leads to aturning moment of
(6.3)
The component inthe z-direction leads to yaw, whilst the smaller term givesriseto roll.
7. Forces on the Hydroplanes
In the same way as for the rudder, wecan calculate the instantaneous forces on the
hydroplanes when they aremovedto angles 8P during uniformmotion of the submarine.
The lift force is in the -z-direction and has magnitude 47rpUgAp8P, where Ap is the
area of the hydroplane. There are4of these surfaces but they areconnected inpairs with
the same surface area and angle to the flow(8B for the bowplanes and 8S for the stern
planes). Thus any roll moment cancels and the only contribution will be to pitch, so
(
0 )
F- 0
- - E47rpUJAp8P ,
(7.1)
where wesumover the 4 hydroplanes and x p is the x-coordinate of the plane. Again,
these results are only validfor small angles of attack as if the angle is too large then the
boundary layer separates, givingriseto aturbulent wakeand asudden drop in lift as the
aerofoil stalls.
8. Lift Forces on the Submersible Hull
Lift forces onthe conning tower and submarine as awholeareonly important during
manoeuvres whenthe velocity isat an angleto thebody. For simplicity, weconsider what
happens when the submarine is undergoing translational motion only and separate the
behaviour into symmetric and antisymmetric motion, as donein the linear model.
6
For symmetric motion, there is no velocity component in the y-direction and no roll
or yaw. Thus wehavethe linear velocity
(
UO + U' )
U= 0 ,
w'
(8.1)
for small perturbations from uniform forward motion. The main component of lift is
-pruo in the -z-direction if there is a circulation r. Even if there is no circulation, we
can still have aturning moment and for an elliptical cylinder, this can be approximated
by
N=( 41TPuiL 2W') ,
where Lis the submarine length (Acheson 1990p.143).
For anti symmetric motion, wehaveno velocity component in the z-direction and no
pitch. Nowthe velocity isgivenby
(8.2)
(
UO +U' )
u= v' ,
o
(8.3)
and the main component of lift is -pruo in the -y-direction for a circulation r. The
turning moment this time contributes to yawand canbewritten as
(
0)
N= 0 .
-41r pU
O
L 2 v'
(8.4)
Inthe antisymmetric case, wealsohaveanadditional contribution dueto the conning
tower, which acts as an aerofoil. Then to leading order, the lift forceis
(8.5)
and has moment
(
i;)
N=-41rpUoAe ? '
-v L ex
(8.6)
where L ex and L ez are the x and z components respectively of the centre of lift on the
conning tower and Ae isthe area. If inaddition, wehavesmall rotation, then definingthe
position vector of the centre of the conning tower by
(8.7)
7
the velocity of this point is
v=U+0x re.
(8.8)
In this case, the angular velocity isgivenby
and soincomponents, wehave
(
o, +U' )
V = v' - PZO +r x; .
(8.9)
Thus wecanreplace v' in (8.5) and (8.6) by v' - pZe +rXe to obtain the appropriate force
and moment for small rotation.
9. Vortex Shedding
Vortex shedding becomes a problem when either the angle of attack of one of the
hydroplanes is too high or when the submarine is undergoing rapid manoeuvring. This
leads to additional drag forces and it was thought possible that history effects might be
important if part of the submarine movedthrough apreviously shedvortex. However, this
isunlikely to occur as wewill seeinthis section.
If r =(x, y, z) istheposition vector of apoint onthesubmarine hull, then the velocity
of this point isgivenby
(
Uo +u' +qz - r
y
)
V=U+0xr = v' - pz +rx ,
w
'
+py - qx
(9.1)
for arbitrary rotation of the submarine. If werestrict ourselves to considering aturn ina
horizontal circle, then p~ r, q ~ r and the front and back of the submarine are givenby
(L /2,O ,O ) sothat equation (9.1) simplifiesto
(
o;+u' )
V =v' ~L /2 .
(9.2)
The anglef3 between the front or back of the submarine and its local velocity isgiven by
tanf3 = v' rL /2.
Uo+u'
(9.3)
If r is positive so that the yawangle is increasing in the turn, then v' will be negative
if the submarine is side-slipping. Thus there is alarger angle at the back and so vortex
shedding is more likely there. Inthis situation, history effects will be unimportant as the
vortices will beleft behind.
8
Defining the diameter of the turning circleto be TD, the angular velocity r can be
approximated by
2Uo
r=--,
TD
(9.4)
and so
v' L
f 3 ' ;::j - - - (9.5)
o, Tv'
at the rear of the submarine. There will then beabluff-body drag contribution inthe X
and Y directions proportional to
(
VI L ) 2
U
o
- Tv '
although wenote that the linearization isnolonger appropriate if TDistoo small.
10. Conclusions and Further Work
The linear method currently usedisvirtually identical tothe aircraft stability deriva-
tives model (Duncan 1952, Duncan et al. 1970). It would be worthwhile conducting a
thorough survey of the aircraft literature to seewhat has been done as the problems are
similar. For military purposes, fighter aircraft aredesignedtobeunstable togivehighma-
noeuvrability and must beflownby computer. Sophisticated software and computational
fluid dynamical (CFD) packages are availablefor this and it may be possible to modify
the codeand techniques to enable themto beapplied to submarines.
Toimproveonthe linear method, further modellingof theforcesand moments dueto
fluid effectswill benecessary. Someof this may have to be doneusing aCFD approach.
Thegeneral equations for thefluidplussubmarine will then havetobetreated numerically,
possibly after simplification using perturbation methods.
A short discussiononthe secondproblemof instability during surfacing ledtovarious
suggestions. It isthe presenceof theextra water intheconningtower whichisdetrimental
as it causes the centre of gravity to be above the centre of buoyancy, leading to a roll
moment. Thus, the possibility of installing pumps or adding extra holes at the base of
the conning tower to aid the draining of water werementioned. The addition of baffles
parallel to the x-axis to changetheflowand sloshingmodes wasalsoproposed, but it was
unclear whether this would make the situation better or worse. Somefurther work was
done after the conferenceondrainage rates fromthe conning tower and the magnitude of
the turning moment produced by the water level in the sail being above sea-level. (See
separate report). Additionally, concern was raised about whether the free-flood casing
meant that the submarine behaviour wassignificantly different fromarigid body during
normal manoeuvring aswell asonsurfacing. Moreworkisneeded inthis area toestablish
whether the effects areimportant or not.
References
Acheson, D.J. (1990) Elementary Fluid Dynamics, OxfordUniversity Press.
Batchelor, G.K. (1967) An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics, Cambridge University Press.
Duncan, W.J. (1952) The Control and Stability of Aircraf t, Cambridge University Press.
Duncan, W.J., Thorn, A.S. &Young, A.D. (1970) Mechanics of Fluids 2nded. Arnold.
Fowles, G.R. (1977) AnalyticalMechanics 3rded. Holt-Saunders International Editions.
9
Appendix
Let Rbethe position vector of apoint P inspacewith respect to inertial axes fixed
in space, and Ro be the position of the centre of the sub-axes. Then r =R - Ro is the
position vector of P inthe sub-axes. The submarine isrotating with angular velocity 0,
which isgivenby
(A. 1)
where p, q and r are the angular velocities about the x, y and z axes respectively. Then
given any vector quantity q, the rate of change of q with respect to time in the inertial
fixedframe isrelated to that inthe moving sub-frame of reference by
(A. 2)
where '.' isthe time derivative inthe moving frame (Fowles 1977). Thus applying this to
the vector R- Ro, wehave
(A. 3 )
where Uo is the velocity of the origin of the sub-frame. Differentiating with respect to
time again and noting that
(
dUO) .
&in =UO+OxUO,
(A. 4)
weobtain
(~:) in =r+20X i: +nX r +0X (0X r) +Do+0X Vo.
(A. 5)
If P is apoint of the rigid body, then the time derivatives of r in the sub-frame are
zero. By taking Rg to bethe position of the centre of gravity inthe inertial frame and rg
to be the corresponding position inthe sub-frame, wecan apply Newton's second law
(A. 6)
to obtain
F=m [ si X rg +0X (0X rg) +Do +0X Uo] .
Resolving F, Uo, and rg insub-coordinates as
(A. 7)
(A. 8)
10
weobtain the equations
x=m[u - vr +qw - Xg(q2 +r2) +Yg(qp - r) +Zg(pr +q) ] ,
Y =m[v +ru - pw +Xg(pq +r) - yg(p2 +r2) +Zg(rq - p) ] , (A. 9)
Z =m[w +pv - qu +x 9 (pr - q) +Y9 (qr +p) - Z9 (p2 +q2) ] .
These agreewith the general equations of motion provided.
Wenowlook at the moments acting on the body. The angular momentum, L about
the centre of gravity canbewritten interms of moments and products of inertia as
(
I'
L= -r
yx
-I~x
-I~Z)
-I~z n.
I '
z
(A.IO )
Wenote that here atypical moment and product of inertia aredefined as
I~y =J px' Y' dV,
(A. 11)
where x', y', z' are the distances fromthe centre of gravity, sothat the product of inertia
is the negative of the usual definition. If N' is the moment of the external forces about
the centre of gravity, then
But
(
dL) =N' .
d t in
(
dL) =t+0X L,
d t in
(A. 12)
(A. 13 )
and
N' =N-rg X F, .(A. 14)
where N is the moment about the originin the sub-frame. Thus using F from(A. 7) and
defining the components of N to beK, Mand N, weobtain
K =l xi) +(Iz - Iy) qr - Izx(r +pq) +Iyz(r
2
- q2) +Ixy(pr - q)
+ mYg(w +vp - qu) - mZg(v - wp +ru) ,
M=Iyq +(Ix - Iz) rp - Ixy(p +qr) +Izx(p2 - r2) +Iyz(qp - r)
+ mZg(u - vr +wq) - mXg(w - uq +vp) ,
N=Izr +(Iy - Ix) pq - Iyz(q +rp) +Ixy(q2 - p2) +Izx(rq - P)
+ mXg(v - wp +ur) - mYg(u - vr +wq) ,
(A. 15)
where
Ix =I~ +m(y; +z;) ,
t.,=I~y +mXgYg,
etc. so that Ix, Ixy, ... are the moments and products of inertia about axes through the
origin inthe sub-frame.
Contributions by P. Wilmott, P. Howell, G. Richardson, C. Robinson, S. Harris.
Report compiled by S. Harris.
11
u X
y v Y
z l
w\ J
Z
Figure la
roll
yaw
Figure Ib
NOTE ABOUT THE SUBMARINE SURFACING PROBLEM
I wasnot present at the 1994Study Groupmeeting at Strathclyde, soI didn't hear
the background to this problem, but, as aformer RNVR National ServiceOfficer who
served in submarines in the years 1953- 1955, I wonder if this is anewmanifestation
of an old problem. In the famous book "Oneof Our Submarines" by Edward Young
D.S.O., D.S.C., R.N.V.R., (Rupert Hart-Davis, 1952) p.68 onereads:-
"Surfacing in really rough weather was a frightening business, there was a tricky
moment beforewereached full buoyancy, and beforethe water had drained out of the
bridge casing, whenthe boat wasextremely unstable, andif wesurfacedwith our beam
to the wavesthere was aserious danger of beingrolledright over. These early S-boats
were particular tender in this respect, and oneof them is believed to have been lost
through 'turning turtle."
In what followsI calculate howmuch sea-water might still be left in the "fin" of
a modern submarine when the base of the finclears the surface. This will depend on
the drainage arrangements for the fin, the key parameters being Ad A2' the ratio of
Al the (horizontal plane) cross-sectional area of the fin and A2 the total area of the
drainage outlets, k the vertical rate of surfacingof the submarine as the finrises above
the surfaceof the sea, and H the height of the fin. The danger that this top-weight of
water represents can be calculated usingestimates of the submarine hull diameter and
of the submarine's total weight and metacentric height. Estimates herehavebeenmade
frompublished information and photographs in popular books e.g. of the "Swiftsure"
class of fleet submarines - "SSNs". The basic physical lawused is Torricelli's formula
in whichthe flowrate (m
3
/ s) through an orificeof area A is givenby exAv'2gh where
ex is a "coefficient of contraction" (taken inthis note as unity), 9 the acceleration due
to gravity (9.81mjs2) and h denotes the headof water abovethe orifice. (This formula
with ex =1is used extensively in the "Admiralty Manual of Seamanship" to calculate
flooding of ashipwhichhas suffereddamagefromholingdueto shell fire).
1
WAtER LE"E:J-
J j ~
I N F , , . . ,
kt.
j ~
~
' "
I "(t;)t.
-------- -
H
h . ( t )
t. SEA SuR
, ~, If

,
r'
SU~I\oo\AR'NE
Consider the geometry as shownin Fig. 1. Considering the drainage fromthe fin
using Torricelli'5 rule
(1)
r(t) beingthehydrostatic head(ina"quasi-steady" calculation). Nowsinceh(t) - r(t) +
kt =H then r =it +k, sothat
(2)
or
. k aA2 ~
r =- Al y2gr.
Nowput y2 =r sothat r =2yiJ then substituting into (3) weobtain
(3)
(4)
or
J
ydy - J '5 ..
dt
(
1 - 2oA2 ~y) - 2 '
kAl Y 2"
(5)
whichmay beintegrated to give
(6)
2
Now wh~n t = 0, h(O ) = H so r(O ) = 0, hence y(O ) =0 and C = ~(~)2 Sg . Then
equation (6) can be rewritten as
(7)
or
Y(t) - InY(t) =Kt +1 ,
(8)
where
(
) ( )
2
20: A2 9 2 A2 9
Y(t) =1- - - !iy, K =0: - -.
k Al V2 Al k
(9)
Calculation of water height in the fin on completion of surfacing.
Weconsider surfacing to be complete when the finbase clears the surface of the sea
i.e. at atime t =t* =H/k.
Weseek to find the height of water in the finwhichis r(t*). Wefirst find y(t*) from
solving equation (8) for Y(t*). This can be done iteratively using a pocket calculator
knowing that the right-hand sideof (8) is 1+Kt* =1+0:
2
(t)2 W. Fromequation (9)
wecan calculate y( t*) fromY(t*) and finally r( t*) sincer( t*) =y2(t*) by the definition
of T.
Inthe subsequent table of results H has been taken fromdrawings of the "Swiftsure"
class of SSN fleet submarines as H =10m, 0: =1, 9=9.81m/ s 2 and arange of values
of k (m/ s) , the vertical rate of surfacing, and of Ad A2' the ratio of finhorizontal cross-
sectional area (Ad to the total area of drainage orifices (A2) havebeen considered. The
results are tabulated belowin Table 1.
k 0 1 2 3 00
AI/A2
20 0 6.10 7.87
8.49
10.00
10 0 3.58 6.11 7.24 10.00
The entries in Table 1showthe height of water (m) still in the finon completion of
surfacing. (Note that improved drainage means bigger values of A2 and smaller values
of AdA2')
With further estimates of heights of this top-weight of unwanted water abovethe sub-
marine centre of gravity the "overturning moment" can becompared with the "restoring
moment" dependent on the metacentric height. For the "Swiftsure" class some rough
3
estimates for the 6.10 mentry in Table 1 givean overturning moment of 989,535 kgm
against arestoring moment of 1,400,000kgm. (Assumptions: height of finH =10m, di-
ameter of pressure hull 15m, metacentric height 1/3 m, fincross-sectional area, less area
taken up by tower, periscopes etc. Al =15m
2
, published displacement 4,200 tonnes.)
P.c. Parks, OCIAM
4