## 4 Experimental Validation
### Experimental Results  
We carried out experimental tests and compared the results with the simulation. Because the spray cooling system has not been installed in the platform yet, we only compared the shutdown selection of the backup engine between the simulation and experiment. In Section 2.2, three different shutdown selections were investigated via simulations. Similarly, the same shutdown selections were tested using the experimental platform. The experimental parameter settings are listed in Table 7. In this case study, the Froude scaling law [14] was adopted to determine the volume of the ventilator. [PERSON] scaling law requires that the Archimedes numbers of the scaled platform and the real cabin are equal, i.e.,  
\[\frac{\lambda_{g}\lambda_{l}\lambda_{\Delta T}}{\lambda_{v}^{2}\lambda_{T}}=1 \tag{1}\]  
where the length coefficient \(\lambda_{g}\) = 1; the scaling coefficient \(\lambda_{l}\) = 10; the temperature varying coefficient \(\lambda_{\Delta T}\) = 1; the temperature coefficient \(\lambda_{T}\) = 1; the wind speed coefficient \(\lambda_{v}\) = 3.16. Thus, the scaling coefficient of the ventilation volume can be calculated as  
\[\lambda_{G}=\lambda_{v}\lambda_{l}^{2}=316 \tag{2}\]  
Because the ventilation volume per ventilator in the real JU-2000E jack-up offshore platform is 182,000 m\({}^{3}\)/h, the ventilation volume per ventilator in the experimental platform is 182,000/316 = 1152 m\({}^{3}\)/h.  
In Table 1, the simulation results gave the temperature sections at \(Z\) = 2 m and \(Z\) = 5.5 m in height as the representative temperatures of the lower and upper parts of the cabin. Accordingly, in the experimental validation, the temperatures at these two sections were calculated. Tables 8 and 9 show the temperature calculation results.  
As can be seen in Tables 8 and 9, if shut down the right side engines the average and maximum temperatures at both sections are smaller than these of the other two shutdown choices. As a result, it is better to shut down one of the right side engines for the marine cabin. This conclusion is consistent with that in the simulation analysis. Hence, the simulation results in this study are reliable. We will  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Shutdown** & **Ventilation Temperature** & **Ventilation Volumes** \\ \hline Left side engines & 22 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 1152 m\({}^{3}\)/h \\ Middle engines & 22 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 1152 m\({}^{3}\)/h \\ Right side engines & 22 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 1152 m\({}^{3}\)/h \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 7: Engine shutdown test results.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Shutdown** & **Average** & **Maximum** & **Minimum** \\ \hline Left side engines & 35.09 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 47.8 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 26.2 \({}^{\circ}\)C \\ Middle engines & 36.09 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 47.2 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 21.2 \({}^{\circ}\)C \\ Right side engines & 33.72 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 40.7 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 22.1 \({}^{\circ}\)C \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 8: Temperatures at Section \(Z\) = 2 m.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Shutdown** & **Average** & **Maximum** & **Minimum** \\ \hline Left side engines & 35.78 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 48.2 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 25.1 \({}^{\circ}\)C \\ Middle engines & 36.96 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 48.1 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 21.8 \({}^{\circ}\)C \\ Right side engines & 34.85 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 42.3 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 22.3 \({}^{\circ}\)C \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 9: Temperatures at Section \(Z\) = 5.5 m.  
further investigate various experimental scenarios and report the results once the spray cooling is installed in the experimental platform.