## 3 Electrode Station Configuration
### Eighth Electrode Station Configuration--Straight Frames Adapted to a T-Shaped Protective Dam
1) & 22.00 & 51.47 & \(-\)58.39 & 56.90 & \(-\)56.90 & 2.37 & 25.99 & 11,542 & 9.889 & 6832 \\ \cline{2-11}  & 5 frames operating & 22.00 & 57.75 & \(-\)60.15 & 58.66 & \(-\)53.05 & 1.23 & 25.05 & 11,664 & 9.994 & \(-\)3298 \\ \cline{2-11}  & 5 frames operating & (except for no. 1) & 22.00 & 52.15 & \(-\)60.58 & 57.56 & \(-\)57.56 & 1.22 & 25.05 & 15,  
From the study of the results for the region of Stachtoroi, the following emerges:  
* The length of the critical zone, from the centre of the arrangement, reaches up to 43.57 m in all directions depending on the way of uneven loading of the station. The arrangement can be placed at the isobath of 5.5 m (3.0 m for breaking wave water + 2.13 m electrode height), but to ensure that the centre of the arrangement is more than 44 m from the land, it can be placed in the position of Figure 31, at an isobath of the order of 14 m. Due to the large inclination of the seabed, the frames can reach 10 m on the shallow side, which meet the requirements of non-contact with breaking wave water. Alternatively, the arrangement can be placed closer to the shore in such a way that the nearest electrode frames touch the 5.5 m isobath, thus limiting the inland effect to about 10 m, while the central base placement depth is limited to an average depth of 8.2 m.
* The deviation in the maximum developing electric field strength of the electrode station compared to a single frame (19.92 V/m against 17.96 V/m, according to Table 11 in [2]) is of the order of 10.9%, which is significant and greater than those in the 2 nd (19.08 V/m of Table 1), 7 th (19.49 V/m of Table 6), and 8 th configurations (19.69 V/m of Table 7), while it is smaller than the rest of the configurations. Increasing the radius of the central base results in a small decrease. * In the area of the frame that is set out of operation, electric field strengths greater than 1.25 V/m are observed, although they do not exceed the value of 2.48 V/m, which is below 2.5 V/m; therefore, no issues arise (regarding the safety of the diver) when maintaining the frames. If it is desired that the frames be below the limit of 1.25 V/m, the respective radius of the central base should be 19 m (as it has been established after successive tests with base radii from 9.0 m and above, with a step of 0.5 m). * The developed absolute potentials and the corresponding values of the electrode station resistance, with respect to remote earth, are significantly better (7.21 kV, 6.18 \(\Omega\)) over all previous configurations. It behaves even better during symmetrical operation. * The developing absolute potentials at the centre O of the central base take smaller absolute values than the respective maximum absolute potentials due to the field interactions, where the largest values appear near the operating frames, as was also the case at Korakia. * In field behaviour results, there are now similarities in the case of single-frame non-operation, due to the symmetry of the array layout, and the same conclusions apply as in the case of Korakia. Summing up, the ninth configuration gives quite improved results, in terms of absolute potential and electrode station resistance (with respect to remote earth), ensuring that there is practically no danger to the diver during single-frame maintenance under full-load conditions of the electrode station. Increasing the radius of the central base ultimately leads to the development of smaller electric field strengths, and (in most cases) also absolute potentials and electrode station resistances, with respect to remote earth. However, in the latter, the existence of a cavity--within the base--plays an important role for large outer radii.