Scribd
Upload
104 views1 page

Average Range Avrg. Approach CT Ef After Fill Replacement 8.36 3.72 69% Before Fill Replacement 7.53 4.08 65%

This document compares average range, average approach, and contact efficiency percentages before and after a fill replacement was performed. Average range and average approach both improved after the fill replacement, increasing to 8.36 yards and decreasing to 3.72 yards respectively. Contact efficiency also increased from 65% before the fill replacement to 69% after.

Uploaded by

NIGERE
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
104 views1 page

Average Range Avrg. Approach CT Ef After Fill Replacement 8.36 3.72 69% Before Fill Replacement 7.53 4.08 65%

This document compares average range, average approach, and contact efficiency percentages before and after a fill replacement was performed. Average range and average approach both improved after the fill replacement, increasing to 8.36 yards and decreasing to 3.72 yards respectively. Contact efficiency also increased from 65% before the fill replacement to 69% after.

Uploaded by

NIGERE
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Average range Avrg.

Approach CT ef
After fill replacement 8.36 3.72 69%
Before Fill replacement 7.53 4.08 65%

You might also like