**4. Test Case**

The multiple generation algorithms were tested on a simple test geometry to study their effect on damage consequences' assessment. In the present section, the test arrangement is described. Then, the tested training and validation databases are described.

#### *4.1. Test Arrangement*

The test arrangement was a box-shaped barge having the general arrangement shown in Figure 5, and the main particulars are provided in Table 1. The test barge had three decks: DK1 located near the water plane (at 5 m above the *BL*), DK2 (located at 10 m above the *BL*), and the bulkhead deck DK3 (located 15 m above the baseline). Beneath the bulkhead deck, the barge was divided into five main compartments. In first and third compartments, the lowest rooms extended from the barge bottom to DK2. In the lowest room within Compartments 1 and 3, longitudinal bulkheads were fit on the centerline. In addition, another longitudinal bulkhead was fit in Compartment 5 between DK2 and DK3 to create a long flooding chain when the lowest room was damaged.

**Figure 5.** General arrangement of the test geometry.


**Table 1.** Main particulars of the test geometry.

All the rooms were considered fully vented, had unitary permeability and were interconnected by a set of openings, as shown in Figure 5. The openings' size and position are provided in Table 2. To apply a hydrostatic code based on pressure integration technique [28], both the rooms and the openings were modeled with nonstructured triangular meshes having a maximum panel area of 3.125 m<sup>2</sup> and 0.25 m2, respectively. A sketch of the 3D model of the test geometry is shown in Figure 6.

**Table 2.** Main characteristics of the test geometry openings. *C* = (*XC*,*YC*, *ZC*) is the center of the opening in the ship-fixed reference system.


**Figure 6.** Mesh of the internal rooms of the test geometry.
