The present disclosure relates generally to trawl doors used for trawl fishing, seismic surveillance line spreading and spreading of other items towed in water, and, more particularly, to trawl doors adapted for stable, more efficient operation at all angles of attack including larger angles of attack.
A trawl is a large net generally in the shape of a truncated cone trailed through a water column or dragged along a sea bottom to gather marine life including fish. Methods and apparatuses for spreading a trawl trailed behind a moving towing vessel, frequently identified as “trawl doors,” are well known. Usually, a trawl door attaches to a towing vessel by a single main towing warp or other towing line secured to the trawl door near or at the trawl door's midpoint. The trawl then attaches to the trawl door by a pair of towing bridles, i.e. an upper and a lower towing bridle, respectively secured to the trawl door at or near opposite ends thereof. Trawl doors are also identified by other names, most commonly including “otter boards” and “doors”. Trawl doors, when used in the seismic industry are often referred to as “deflectors” or “paravanes,” and may have several main “wings”, main “plates” and/or “slats.”
While a towed trawl door having a particular shape may operate stably throughout a range of angle of attack, when towed through water at a larger angle of attack most trawl doors exhibit instability and/or low efficiency, i.e. high drag. It is important to note that usage and meaning of the term “larger angle of attack” varies from fishery to fishery. Furthermore, trawl doors otherwise configured for a certain angle of attack when aboard ship ultimately fish at different angles of attack depending upon the lengths respectively of the sweep and/or bridles coupled to the trawl door. Similarly, the lengths respectively of a trawl's footropes and headropes can affect a trawl door's angle of attack while being towed through water. Moreover, how the towing vessel maneuvers can vary a trawl door's angle of attack. Lastly, the preceding factors that affect a towed trawl door's actual angle of attack do not do so independently. Rather, these factors act in concertedly in affecting a towed trawl door's actual operating angle of attack.
At a larger angle of attack such as over thirty degrees) (30°), and especially at over thirty-five degrees)(35°), most trawl doors exhibit instability and/or low efficiency, i.e. high drag. However, trawl doors commonly operate at such larger angles of attack to create enough drag induced directional forces on the trawl doors so as to impart sufficient stability to the trawl door system to thereby maintain the trawl doors in a workable orientation in the presence of a multitude of destabilizing forces routinely imparted to a trawl door during use. Destabilizing forces result from, for example, side currents, imperfections in rigging, and loss of forward through-water speed affecting an inboard trawl door during turning of a trawling vessel. For example, when a towing vessel turns the inboard trawl door can become almost stationary relative to the water. As is readily apparent, slowing a trawl door down in relationship to the water reduces its spreading force, i.e. the trawl door's drag induced directional force. A similar situation can arise when a trawl door experiences a strong side current. Another condition which can cause trawl door instability is when some portion of the trawl contacts the sea floor. As is readily apparent, a trawl contacting the sea floor increases the force applied to the trawl door through the lower towing bridle in comparison with the force applied through the upper towing bridle. Stabilizing trawl doors when they operate under conditions such as those described above usually requires that the trawl doors operate at a larger angle of attack particularly at slower towing speeds.
Higher angles of attack are required at slower towing speeds to obtain a sufficiently large drag induced force vector required to stabilize trawl doors at slower towing speeds, e.g. under four and one-half (4.5) knots, and especially two (2.0) to three and nine tenths (3.9) knots, as compared to at faster towing speeds, e.g. over 5.0 knots. When trawling at slower towing speeds trawl doors generally cannot overcome the plethora of destabilizing dynamic forces that may affect their operation. Conversely, at faster towing speeds trawl doors generally are able to overcome such destabilizing forces.
Specific considerations concerning trawl door instability include the fact that few parts of the world experience currents in excess of four and one-half (4.5) knots. However, during a turn an inboard trawl door's slower forward through-water speed affects the door's operation akin to a side current. Furthermore, when trawl doors lose their ability to spread they may tangle with each other, a phenomenon known as “crossing the doors.” Remedying “crossed trawl doors” is a dangerous and time consuming procedure At faster towing speeds, e.g. over 5.0 knots, the effect of side currents and turns on trawl door operation is generally nullified by the towing vessel's faster towing speed.
The instability exhibited by trawl doors when operating at a larger angle of attack can be attributed to a phenomenon frequently referred to as “dynamic stall.” An airfoil or hydrofoil stalls when fluid flowing past the airfoil or hydrofoil separates therefrom. Stall may be a steady type wherein the location at which the flow separates from the airfoil or hydrofoil is essentially stationary. Alternatively, flow separation may be of an unsteady type wherein the separation location with respect to the airfoil or hydrofoil varies with time and flow conditions. In the scientific literature for fluid dynamics, dynamic stall of helicopter rotor blades and rotating stall of axial compressor blades provide well recognized examples of undesirable consequences resulting from unsteady flow separation. If unchecked, large oscillatory forces and moments produced in both types of stall can result in severe structural damage and erratic performance of such devices.
As described in “Evaluation of Turbulence Models for Unsteady Flows of an Oscillating Airfoil” by G. R. Srinivasan, J. A. Ekaterinaris and W. J. McCroskey, Computers & Fluids, vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 833-861, the term dynamic stall usually refers to the unsteady separation and stall phenomena of aerodynamic bodies or lifting surfaces. As described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,267,331 (“the '331 patent), a dominant feature characterizing dynamic stall on an airfoil or hydrofoil is a strong vertical flow, which begins near the leading-edge, enlarges, and then travels downstream along the foil. When a airfoil or hydrofoil reaches fairly large angles of attack, past the static stall angle limit, the resulting unsteady flowfield is characterized by massive separation and large-scale vertical structures. One important difference between this flowfield structure and that generated by the static stall is the large hysteresis in the unsteady separation and reattachment process When dynamic stall occurs maximum values of lift, drag, and pitching-moment coefficients can greatly exceed their static counterparts, and not even the qualitative behavior of these conditions can be reproduced by neglecting the unsteady motion of the airfoil's or hydrofoil's surface. Typically, the problem of dynamic stall is addressed by some form of airfoil geometry modification (e.g. leading-edge slat), or boundary-layer control (e.g. blowing or suction), where these changes are geared specifically to the leading-edge region where the vortex originates. The '331 patent states that all methods of dynamic stall control that have been attempted heretofore have been less than satisfactory. There is thus a widely recognized need for, and it would be highly advantageous to have, a more satisfactory method of dynamic stall control for airfoils and hydrofoils than methods now known in the art.
International Application no. PCT/IS2005/000016 published February 2006, as International Publication No. WO 2006/011163 A3 that is entitled “High Speed, Increased Hydrodynamic Efficiency, Light-Weight Molded Trawl Door and Methods for Use and Manufacture” (“the '016 PCT patent application”) describes molding portions of trawl door deflector bodies having an airfoil profile from synthetic materials. The preferred synthetic material for forming portions of airfoil profile deflector bodies identified in the '016 PCT patent application is a polyamide (nylon) combined with an elastomer in a ratio such that the solidified synthetic material receives impacts fracture-free.
International Application no. PCT/EP2005/011722 published 11 November 2006, as International Publication No. WO 2006/048258 A1 that is entitled “Higher Efficiency Pelagic Trawl Door Construction Employing Universally Available Materials and Methods” (“the '722 PCT patent application”) describes a V-shaped trawl door configuration that includes a plurality of leading edge slats. In one embodiment disclosed in the '722 PCT patent application, the arcuate deflector bodies and slats are all formed from plate material, preferably steel. Instead of using arcuate deflector bodies formed from plate material, as disclosed in the '016 PCT patent application alternative embodiment deflector bodies in accordance with the '722 PCT patent application are formed with an airfoil profile and are molded from a synthetic material.
The highly efficient trawl doors disclosed both in the '016 and '722 PCT patent applications are generally characterized by a main deflector body having an airfoil profile specifically identified in the '016 PCT patent application, and at least one and preferably two (2) leading edge slats. Both the '016 and the '722 PCT patent application are hereby incorporated by reference.
The trawl doors disclosed in the '016 and '722 PCT patent applications are essentially a method for the manufacture and use of a highly efficient trawl door that operates best at faster towing speeds. Exhaustive engineering and flume tank testing of these trawl doors initially indicated that they should function better than all known trawl doors at all angles of attack used in the pelagic fishing industry including larger angles of attack. Unfortunately, trawl doors constructed in accordance with the disclosures of the '016 and '722 PCT patent applications, despite being stable at shallower angles of attack up to at least eighteen degrees)(18°) used by faster towing speed trawling vessels, have proven to be useful only at faster towing speed and shallower angles of attack.
A majority of the world's trawling vessels operate at what are considered slower towing speeds, thereby requiring trawl doors that can be fished or deployed at larger angles of attack such as approximately thirty degrees)(30°), and especially from thirty) (30°) to forty degrees) (40°) or more with approximately thirty-six degrees) (36°) being commonly used in the Alaska Pollock fishery. At these angles of attack, trawl doors constructed in accordance with the '016 and '722 PCT patent applications generally fail. In actual use, these trawls doors have exhibited instability at larger angles of attack, i.e. over thirty degrees) (30°). While when used by some vessels such trawl doors have functioned at a larger angle of attack, but not better than conventional trawl doors, when used by other vessels, perhaps due to variations in riggings, the trawl doors fail completely. That is, trawl doors constructed in accordance with the '016 and '722 PCT patent applications when used at higher angles of attack in slower towing speed fisheries are unable to maintain a stable position, and are useless generally performing worse than other contemporary conventional trawl doors. In general such trawl doors are so unstable at angles of attack of thirty-five degrees) (35°) and greater, that none have been purchased by anyone for such use.
In one instance, after exhaustive engineering at great expense, a trawl door combining the teachings of the '016 and '722 PCT patent applications was tried in the Alaska Pollock fishery. However, the trawl doors exhibited much higher drag and failed to adequately spread the trawl. That is, these trawl doors spread the trawl less than that provided by conventional trawl doors, and the drag on the vessel was greater than that of conventional trawl doors. Thus, use of the doors was rejected in this particular fishery, which is one of the largest, best managed and healthiest fisheries in the world. Up to the present, a pair of trawl doors constructed in accordance with the '016 and '722 PCT patent applications has not been sold into the Alaska Pollock fishery, or into any moderate to slower towing speed trawl fishery.
To make trawl doors combining the teachings of the '016 and '722 PCT patent applications function well at slower towing speeds, a possibility was considered for:
Based upon results obtained by additional flume tank experimentation, presently it is believed that flume tank testing previously employed when engineering such trawl doors utilized a methodology that, by having models of such trawl doors fixed into place on highly sensitive measuring equipment to accurately measure lift and drag values, prevented encountering the trawl doors' instability. In fact, when the trawl doors failed during sea trials initially instability was not suspected as causing the failure. Instead, the failure was initially attributed to inadequate rigging parameters or an inadequate connection point of the main wire or warp to the trawl door. Only recently has it been discovered that these assumptions and beliefs were incorrect. Only now, using different flume tank modeling methodology, has the inherent instability of such trawl doors at larger angles of attack at which the vast majority of fishing vessels worldwide operate been encountered during flume tank testing.
Thus, as described above and for the reasons appearing there, only recently it has become apparent that trawl doors constructed in accordance with the '016 and '722 PCT patent applications are inherently and fatally unstable at the larger angles of attack at which the vast majority of the worlds trawling vessels operate. Furthermore, it has only been realized recently that the fundamental cause for trawl door instability at larger angles of attack is using leading edge slats having conventional configuration and construction in combination with the airfoil main deflector disclosed in the '016 PCT patent application. That is, trawl doors of the type disclosed both in the '016 and in the '722 PCT patent applications fail at larger angles of attack when equipped with conventional leading edge slats.
Thus, there exists a long felt need for a trawl door that is highly efficient at larger angles of attack and can thus be used at slower towing speeds, while not markedly larger in size than existing trawl doors.
There also exists a long felt need for a trawl door that is highly efficient at larger angles of attack that can be manufactured and sold at a reasonable cost.
Thus, the need for a highly efficient trawl door that operates at slower towing speeds while still being of a size and concurrent production cost that make it economically feasible continues in the industry.
Furthermore, there exists a desire in the industry for a highly efficient trawl door that operates well both at faster towing speeds and smaller angles of attack as well as at slower towing speeds and larger angles of attack. Trawl doors exhibiting such characteristics would be less expensive for customers in comparison with having two pairs of trawl doors, i.e. one pair for each situation.
AIRFOIL PROFILE: means a profile for a main wing and/or main deflector (the terms “main wing” and “main deflector” being synonymous for purposes of this disclosure) of a trawl door wherein the camber of the outer side of the main deflector is greater than the camber of the inner side thereof. As stated in the '016 PCT patent application:
ASPECT RATIO: means the height of a trawl door's primary lift generating structures relative to the width of the trawl door's primary lift generating structures. For example, a trawl door having a height of two (2) meters and a width of one (1) meter has an Aspect Ratio of 2:1 (two to one).
PROFILE: means the cross-sectional shape of a trawl door, or of a portion of a trawl door, viewed in a plane that is oriented perpendicularly across the trawl door's vertical dimension.
TRAWL DOOR: means any of a variety of essentially rigid structures having generally rigid deflectors (e.g. not formed of a foldable fabric as a kite) that is adapted for deployment in a body of water behind a towing vessel. More specifically, trawl door means any generally wing shaped and/or fin shaped device used to spread either a fishing net, such as a trawl, or to spread a seismic surveillance array and/or seismic array, such as used in making acoustic surveillance of a sea floor and sub-sea-floor, or to spread apart any other towed item, whether in air or sea. A trawl door usually attaches at a fore end to a terminal end of a main towing warp or other towing line depending from the towing vessel, and at an aft end to at least one other line itself ultimately attached to another towed item. In operation, trawl doors convert a portion of forward motion and/or energy imparted by the towing vessel into horizontally directed force for the purpose of spreading in a generally horizontal direction a trawl, seismic surveillance towed array complex, paravane line or the like.
TRAWL DOOR HEIGHT: the height of a trawl door is defined by the shortest distance between a trawl door's primary lift generating structures' upper edge and a trawl door's primary lift generating structures' lower edge. The Trawl Door Height measurement generally does not include any part of a purely weight shoe, wear plate, or the like, but rather relates to the portion of the trawl door's structure that is capable of efficiently generating lift and/or thrust.
TRAWL DOOR WIDTH: the width of a trawl door is defined by the shortest distance between a trawl door's primary lift generating structures' leading and trailing edges as taken from a profile of a portion of the trawl door. For trawl doors with straight leading and trailing edges, the width is generally the same everywhere along the vertical dimension of the trawl door. For a trawl door with a “swept back” configuration, the trawl door's width also may be expressed as an average of a sum of several trawl door width measurements taken at various profile locations located at varying positions along the vertical dimension of the trawl door, as such trawl doors typically have narrower widths at their extremities than at the middle thereof.
An object of the present disclosure is to provide a more stable trawl door.
Yet another object of the present disclosure is to provide a trawl door that operates more efficiently at a larger angle of attack, such as at greater than thirty degrees) (30°), and particularly greater than thirty-six degrees) (36°) including forty degrees (40°).
Yet another object of the present disclosure is to provide a trawl door that, while operating stably at a larger angle of attack, also operates stably at smaller angles of attack such as eighteen degrees (18°).
It is an object of the present disclosure to teach a trawl door construction and methods for use that meets such needs of the industry.
Briefly, an improved trawl door is adapted for being towed through water both at shallower and at larger angles of attack. The improved trawl door includes at least one main deflector having a profile formed by an inner surface and an outer surface. The profile of the main deflector spans a chord length “C” that extends along a Chord Direction Line between leading and trailing edges of the main deflector. The improved trawl door also includes at least one leading edge slat at least a portion of which is located in front of the outer surface of the main deflector.
The improved trawl door in one aspect is characterized by an acute angle of inclination between a chord line of the leading edge slat and the Chord Direction Line of the main deflector that is at least thirty-five degrees (35°). The improved trawl door in another aspect is characterized by having an aspect ratio of at least two to one (2.0:1.0).
Configured in this way, the improved trawl door betters, in comparison with a conventional trawl door, at least one trawl door efficiency characteristic selected from a group consisting of:
An advantage of trawl doors constructed in accordance with the present disclosure having experimentally determined forward and trailing leading edge slat configurations with angles of attack therefor as disclosed herein exhibit greater stability than trawl doors having a conventional configuration.
Another advantage of trawl doors constructed in accordance with the present disclosure having experimentally determined forward and trailing edge slat configurations with angles of attack therefor as disclosed herein is that the trawl doors exhibit significantly less drag than trawl doors having a conventional configuration both at shallower angles of attack, e.g. eighteen degrees) (18°) to twenty-five degrees) (25°), and at larger angles of attack, e.g. thirty-five degrees) (35°) to forty degrees) (40°) or more.
These and other features, objects and advantages will be understood or apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art from the following detailed description of the preferred embodiment as illustrated in the various drawing figures.
A typical trawl door in accordance the present disclosure may be a V-shaped, i.e. dihedral, trawl door identified in
Each trawl door section 28, 29 respectively includes a main deflector body 24, 25. A pair of forward and trailing leading edge slats 20, 22 provide the trawl door 10 with a lift enhancing structure. A leading edge 11 of the forward leading edge slat 20, located forward of the main deflector bodies 24, 25, constitutes the leading edge 12 of the trawl door 10. At least a portion of the trailing leading edge slat 22 is situated between the forward leading edge slat 20 and the main deflector bodies 24, 25. Configured in this way, the forward and trailing leading edge slats 20, 22 establish a pair of slots, not illustrated in
The slots established by the forward and trailing leading edge slats 20, 22 extend substantially the entire length of each of the main deflector bodies 24, 25 of each trawl door section 28, 29. The forward and trailing leading edge slats 20, 22 and are held in position by fixing opposite ends thereof respectively to the center plate 26, and to plates 31, 33 respectively of the trawl door section 28, 29.
Detachably affixed to the lower trawl door section 29 furthest from the center plate 26 is an adjustable mass weight plate 30. The adjustable mass weight plate 30 aids in stabilizing the trawl door 10 during field operations by affixing an appropriate amount of weight at the lower edge 18 of the lower trawl door section 29 for the purpose of establishing a desired underwater operating depth for the trawl door 10.
The profile 46 illustrated in
The cross-sectional diagram of
An intersection of the dashed line 81 with the dashed line 83 establishes a vertex for an acute angle of inclination 91, that extends from the dashed line 83 to the dashed line 81, for the forward leading edge slat 20 with respect to the dashed line 83, i.e. between the chord lines respectively for the forward leading edge slat 20 and the main deflector body 24. Reference numeral 91 indicates a “forward leading slat angle,” that is also known as the “angle of inclination of the leading slat.” Similarly, an intersection of the dashed line 82 with the dashed line 83 establishes a vertex of an acute angle of inclination 92, that extends from the dashed line 83 to the dashed line 82, for the trailing leading edge slat 22 with respect to the dashed line 83, i.e. between the chord lines respectively for the trailing leading edge slat 22 and the main deflector body 24. Reference numeral 92 indicates a “trailing leading slat angle,” that is also known as the “angle of inclination of the trailing slat.”
Referring now to
If a trawl door 10 includes only the forward leading edge slat 20 then a length “A” indicated by reference numeral 101, identified as the “leading slat gap distance,” is a distance along the Chord Line, i.e. the dashed line 83, between the leading edge 23 of the main deflector body 24 and the leading edge 11 of the forward leading edge slat 20, i.e. also the leading edge 12 of the trawl door 10. Alternatively, if as illustrated in
If as illustrated in
As is readily apparent from the preceding descriptions of the lengths “A” and “B” and from the illustration of
A length “h,” indicated by reference numeral 99, is a shortest distance from the Chord Line, i.e. the dashed line 83, of the leading edge 11 or 38 respectively of the forward leading edge slat 20 or the trailing leading edge slat 22.
A length “D” indicated by reference numeral 105, identified as the “trawl door width,” is the width of the trawl door 10 measured parallel to the Chord Line, i.e. the dashed line 83, from the leading edge 12 of primary lift generating portions of the trawl door 10 to the trailing edge 14 thereof.
Considering
A length “CFS” indicated by reference numeral 107, referred to as the “chord length of the forward slat,” is the distance along the dashed line 81 depicted in
A length “CTS” indicated by reference numeral 109, referred to as the “chord length of the trailing slat,” is the distance along the dashed line 82 depicted in
Set forth below are various configurational aspects for characterizing a trawl door 10 which possesses improved performance due to incorporating the present disclosure's teachings therein.
Due to deflection caused by water pressure on the forward and trailing leading edge slats 20, 22 when in use, the forward slat trailing edge gap, “H,” indicated by reference numeral 98, and the trailing slat trailing edge gap, “H*,” indicated by reference numeral 97, may decrease during use. Therefore, during construction, and when not in use, the lengths “H” and “H*” may be somewhat greater to account for their reduction caused by water deflection pressures, as best experimentally determined on case by case bases (construction by construction and material by material), in order to permit the distances of the leading and trailing slat gap distances to be as taught herein, and such deviation from the values as taught herein is intended to be encompassed within the scope of the claims.
A trawl door 10 configured in accordance with preceding criteria (a) through (f) exhibits improved performance and efficiency at larger angles of attack, is useful at all angles of attack, while being highly stable, and having a superior hydrodynamic stability at a widest range of angles of attack compared with the known art.
Referring back to
Note that for the preceding configuration of the exemplary trawl door 10, the trailing slat trailing edge gap, “H*,” i.e. forty-eight to forty-nine millimeters (48-49 mm), is not less than the leading slat gap length “A,” i.e. forty-seven millimeters (47 mm). That is, the trailing slat trailing edge gap, “H*” is between approximately two and thirteen hundredths percent (2.13%) and four and twenty-five hundredths percent (4.25%) greater than the leading slat gap length “A.” In this particular case, the chord length of the forward slat “CFS,” indicated by reference numeral 107, exceeds the chord length of the trailing slat “CTS,” indicated by reference numeral 109.
In comparison with conventional trawl doors, this configuration for the disclosed trawl door 10 is advantageous for:
Considering now a trawl door 10 having the cross-sectional configuration illustrated in
Continuing consideration of a trawl door 10 having the cross-sectional configuration illustrated in
A value computed by dividing the trailing slat gap distance by the trailing slat trailing edge gap, i.e. dividing B indicated by the reference numeral 102′ by “H*” indicated by the reference numeral 97′, is preferably from 0.11 to 0.2, with a value between 0.12 to 0.19 being more preferred, with a value between 0.13 to 0.18 being yet more preferred, with a value of 0.1786 being presently preferred. However, a value within 10% of and especially within 5% of 1.786 are useful.
The structure of the lift generating portion of the profile of the trawl door of the present disclosure shown in
The table appearing in
For the arcuate plate trawl door 10′ depicted in
While not illustrated in any of the FIGs. one or more of the forward and trailing leading edge slats 20, 22 may be pierced by perforations communicating respectively from the outer side surface 52 to the inner side surface 51 and/or from the outer side surface 54 and inner side surface 53. Such perforations may cover the entire forward or trailing leading edge slat 20, 22, the aft half of the forward and trailing leading edge slats 20, 22, and particularly at the aft portions of the forward or trailing leading edge slat 20, 22.
The distance “h” indicated by reference numeral 99 is preferably within 50% of being 0.042 times the distance “C”, and more preferably within 25%, and yet more preferably within 15%. However, a distance “h” that is uniform or within 25% of being uniform for all leading slats is useful, with a distance “h” being 0.0417 times the distance “C” being highly useful. If the trawl door has more than one leading slat, often a more forward leading slat (e.g. the forward leading slat) can usefully have a distance “h” that is greater than a more aft leading slat's (e.g. the trailing leading slat's) distance “h”.
Due to the effects of various trawl door non-primary lift and/or thrust generating structures on various aspects of the trawl door 10 (e.g. attachment hardware, external strengthening and supporting structures, wear plates when needed and the like), fabricating a trawl door 10 in accordance with the present disclosure requires experimentation to determine optimum values for various parameters appearing in
Depending upon a particular trawl door application, the preceding disclosures regarding forward and trailing leading edge slats 20, 22 are applicable both to straight trawl doors as well as to V-shaped trawl doors. Similarly, the preceding disclosures regarding forward and trailing leading edge slats 20, 22 are applicable to trawl doors 10 where the lower trawl door section 29 is longer and/or has a greater surface area and/or greater lift generating ability than the upper trawl door section 28, often in order to create tendency for the trawl door 10 to rise upwards towards the sea surface. Such trawl doors 10 where the lower trawl door section 29 exhibits greater lift generating ability than the upper trawl door section 28 are usually preferred for shallow water pelagic trawling. Depending upon a particular application, trawl doors 10 in accordance with the present disclosure can have various distributions above and below their balance point and/or main bracket whether used either with pelagic trawls or bottom trawls. A main bracket with several options in both the horizontal as well as the vertical dimension, including the back-and-forth and the up-and-down dimensions, is useful for ensuring that a particular vessel is able to find a suitable connection point for the main warp to the trawl door 10 that provides the needed balance, orientation and angle of attack of the trawl door 10 for the particular item being towed.
It is important to note that the forward and trailing leading edge slats 20, 22 disposed forward of the main deflector bodies 24, 25 are smaller in overall dimension than the main deflector bodies 24, 25. If a trawl door or paravane includes several main deflectors, no one main deflector is considered a slat for the purpose of the present disclosure.
Although the present disclosure has been described in terms of presently preferred embodiments, it is to be understood that such descriptions are purely illustrative and are not to be interpreted as limiting. Consequently, without departing from the spirit and scope of the disclosure, various alterations, modifications, and/or alternative applications of the disclosure will, no doubt, be suggested to those skilled in the art after having read the preceding disclosure. Accordingly, it is intended that the following claims be interpreted as encompassing all alterations, modifications, or alternative applications as fall within the true spirit and scope of the disclosure.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/EP2008/060045 | 7/31/2008 | WO | 00 | 1/26/2010 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60962867 | Jul 2007 | US | |
61126487 | May 2008 | US | |
61132414 | Jun 2008 | US |