Probabilistic Ice Loads Assessments for Arctic Regions: Inputs for Calibration of ISO 19906
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract The characteristics of first-year and multi-year sea ice and icebergs in different offshore regions in the world vary significantly, resulting in varied ice load distributions depending on the specific ice types, environment, and platform characteristics. As part of the development and validation of action factors for design ice loads for the new International Standard ISO 19906 "Petroleum and natural gas industries-Arctic offshore structures", ice load distributions were derived for a broad range of arctic and subarctic conditions and structure types. The results provided necessary input for the calibration of ISO 19906. A methodology for probabilistic analysis of ice loads for various regions has been developed. Important results on the hazard curves were obtained, and these results point to areas where further research is needed in arctic structure design. In the subsequent calibration of action factors, generally results consistent with accepted practice were found, resulting in action factors of 1.35 for Extreme-Level Ice Events (ELIE), and 1.0 for Abnormal-Level Ice Events (ALIE). It was found that the Wang and Croasdale models for multi-year ridge interactions with sloped and conical structures required action factors higher than 1.35. On further review, it was confirmed that these models do result in load distributions with relatively fat tails, requiring higher action factors. It is believed that these results occur because the effect of scaling of flexural strength and other factors related to the scale effect are not taken into account, and that a higher action factor is not necessarily warranted. An overview of the scenarios considered and the methods used to determine load distributions is provided in this paper. The calibration procedure and resulting action factors are described in related papers. Introduction T he design procedures in the ISO 19906 International Standard are based on estimated ice loads associated with Extreme-Level Ice Events (ELIE) and Abnormal-Level Ice Events (ALIE). ELIE corresponds to an annual probability of exceedance of 10–2 and ALIE corresponds to an annual probability of exceedance of 10–4 (Thomas, 2011). Action and resistance factors are calibrated to achieve target reliability levels (Maes, 2011). Good calibration requires that the slope of the tails of annual maximum load distributions be well defined. For example, if the design load is the ELIE load multiplied by an action factor, then to ensure reasonably consistent reliability levels, the probability of exceeding loads larger than the ELIE load must be reasonably well established. The process is illustrated in Figure 1. Given load and resistance distributions, a convolution integration can be performed to determine the probability that the load is greater than the resistance. Given characteristic values, such as the load and resistance at 10–2 and 10–1 annual probabilities of exceedance respectively, the action and resistance factors are used to control the spacing between the distributions and hence the probability of failure. If the tails of distributions behave consistently then it is possible to calibrate to achieve consistent action factors.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».