## 3 Electrode Station Configuration
### General Remarks
* The critical zone of the dam extends beyond it by 27.98 m (with a crest width of 5 m and a suspension distance of at least 1 m) along the xOx/ axis (perpendicular to the dam), which is better than those in almost all previous configurations (1 st\(\rightarrow\)30.3 m, 2 nd\(\rightarrow\)29.7 m, 3 rd\(\rightarrow\)30.8 m, 4 th\(\rightarrow\)31.0 m) and practically identical to that of the 5 th configuration (27.9 m). * The critical zone of the dam extends beyond it by 37.48 m (i.e., 18.74 m on either side) along the yOy/ axis (parallel to the dam axis) in the coastal area. Although the initially estimated required length of the assumed electrode station is 36.4 m (along the yOy/ \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c} \hline  & **Supply Method** & \(\begin{array}{c}I_{\sigma}\\ \textbf{(A/m^{2})}\end{array}\) & \(\begin{array}{c}d_{\sigma_{w},\alpha}\\ \textbf{(m)}\end{array}\) & \(\begin{array}{c}d_{\sigma_{w},\alpha}\\ \textbf{(m)}\end{array}\) & \(\begin{array}{c}\ell_{\sigma_{w},\alpha}\\ \textbf{(m)}\end{array}\) & \(\begin{array}{c}\ell_{\sigma_{w},\alpha}\\ \textbf{(m)}\end{array}\) & \(\begin{array}{c}\ell_{\sigma_{w},\alpha}\\ \textbf{(V/m)}\end{array}\) & \(\begin{array}{c}E_{\sigma_{w}}\\ \textbf{(V/m)}\end{array}\) & \(\begin{array}{c}E_{\sigma_{w}}\\ \textbf{(V/m)}\end{array}\) & \(\begin{array}{c}E_{\sigma_{w}}\\ \textbf{(V/m)}\end{array}\) & \(\begin{array}{c}V_{\sigma_{w},\textbf{max}}\textbf{(V)}\end{array}\) & \(\begin{array}{c}R_{d}\textbf{(f)}\textbf{)}\end{array}\) \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{**Fact**} & 6 frames operating & 18.33 & 44.96 & 44.96 & \(-\)56.55 & 56.55 & - & 22.08 & 23,861 & 20.44 \\ \cline{2-10}  & 5 frames operating & 22.00 & 46.74 & 44.18 & \(-\)58.89 & 53.35 & 3.42 & 26.25 & 25,942 & 22.23 \\ \cline{2-10}  & 5 frames operating & 22.00 & 43.66 & 46.38 & \(-\)58.15 & 55.28 & 3.12 & 26.21 & 24,562 & 21.05 \\ \cline{2-10}  & 5 frames operating & 22.00 & 46.22 & 42.96 & \(-\)57.41 & 56.29 & 2.47 & 25.79 & 25,004 & 21.42 \\ \cline{2-10}  & 5 frames operating & 22.00 & 42.96 & 46.22 & \(-\)56.29 & 57.41 & 2.47 & 25.79 & 22,275 & 19.09 \\ \cline{2-10}  & 5 frames operating & 22.00 & 46.38 & 43.66 & \(-\)55.28 & 58.15 & 3.12 & 26.21 & 25,021 & 21.44 \\ \cline{2-10}  & 5 frames operating & 22.00 & 44.18 & 46.74 & \(-\)53.35 & 58.89 & 3.42 & 26.25 & 24,625 & 21.10 \\ \cline{2-10}  & 6 frames operating & 18.33 & 32.60 & 32.60 & \(-\)42.01 & 42.01 & - & 17.04 & 18,993 & 16.27 \\ \cline{2-10}  & 5 frames operating & 22.00 & 33.98 & 31.93 & \(-\)43.74 & 39.70 & 3.37 & 20.12 & 20,506 & 17.57 \\ \cline{2-10}  & 5 frames operating & 22.00 & 31.57 & 33.70 & \(-\)43.18 & 41.11 & 3.07 & 20.09 & 19,192 & 16.44 \\ \cline{2-10}  & 5 frames operating & 22.00 & 33.62 & 31.04 & \(-\)42.65 & 41.82 & 2.51 & 19.80 & 19,906 & 17.06 \\ \cline{2-10}  & 5 frames operating & 22.00 & 31.04 & 33.62 & \(-\)41.82 & 42.65 & 2.51 & 19.80 & 17,371 & 14.88 \\ \cline{2-10}  & 5 frames operating & 22.00 & 33.70 & 31.57 & \(-\)41.11 & 43.18 & 3.07 & 20.09 & 19,915 & 17.06 \\ \cline{2-10}  & 5 frames operating & (except for no. 1) & 22.00 & 31.93 & 33.98 & \(-\)39.70 & 43.74 & 3.37 & 20.12 & 19,279 & 16.52 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Simulation results for the calculation of electric field strength using a linear current source (\(\rho_{S}=\infty\), without dam, \(\rho_{w}=0.25\)\(\Omega\cdot\)m) and absolute potential using a linear current source (for the near-field) and point current source (for the far-field) (\(\rho_{S}=\infty\), \(\rho_{w}=0.25\), \(\rho_{d}=100\)\(\Omega\cdot\)m) for the 6 th electrode station configuration, in the area of Korakia, Crete (\(\ell_{p}=0.50\) m, \(d_{\ell_{p}}=11.00\) m, \(s_{c}=10.00\) m, \(L=2.13\) m, \(\theta_{S}=248^{\circ}\), \(\theta_{w}=2.29^{\circ}\)) and in the area of Stachtoroi, Attica (\(\ell_{p}=0.50\) m, \(d_{\ell_{p}}=8.00\) m, \(s_{c}=6.00\) m, \(L=2.13\) m, \(\theta_{S}=210^{\circ}\), \(\theta_{w}=0.272^{\circ}\)) with \(E_{limit,S}=1.25\) V/m.