We consider a typical super-cavitating hydrofoil section geometry
as shown in Figure 14. Its thickness is 
of the
chord at the trailing edge, 
at the leading edge, with
linear variation in between. The lower surface of the foil has
a 
parabolic camber and is at an angle of 
. In order to
test the performance of the structural BEM a representative
loading is used on the lower side of the foil, which in the
future is intended to be the hydrodynamic loading, to be determined
from the analysis of the cavitating flow around the hydrofoil.
The results from applying the different methods are shown in
Figure 14. Notice the very poor convergence in the
case of the pure low-order method. The linear ``saw-tooth'' correction
improves the results substantially but still needs a high number of
panels in order to reach convergence. The second order ``saw-tooth''
seems to behave the best and to produce results which are relatively
independent of number of panels. It should be noted that the iterative
method did not converge when less than 100 total number of
panels were utilized.