Evaluation of Global Ice Strength for Design Iceberg Impact Loads
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract In designing an oil and gas platform for offshore arctic and subarctic regions, operators may need to consider potential iceberg impacts when determining optimal structure configuration and ice strengthening requirements. Ice strengthening requirements will depend on the frequency of impacts, the sizes and shapes of icebergs impacting, the impact velocities as determined by the response of icebergs to currents and waves and the strength of the ice. Global ice strength will influence overall design, and local ice strength will influence local structural design. Failure of ice in crushing is a complex process involving mechanisms such as spalling, pressure melting and recrystallization, which are very difficult to model. As a practical approach, global force is often modeled as the product of nominal contact area times global crushing pressure, with global crushing pressure estimated based on full scale measurements. During iceberg impacts, contact area increases with penetration, with the maximum area influenced strongly by the initial kinetic energy of the iceberg, and to a lesser extent by driving forces during the impact. Ice strength, as observed during field measurements, has a significant random variance, both in time during an interaction, and from interaction to interaction. This variance is especially important when designing for iceberg impact loads in regions such the Grand Banks off Canada's east coast where load events are very infrequent, on the order of once every 10 years given ice management. While ice strength data for sea ice loads is often presented in terms of upper limit strengths based on the assumption that there are large numbers of interactions per year, a probabilistic approach that explicitly considers the frequency of events is more appropriate. In this paper, emphasis is given to global ice strength as relates to the total force on a structure, rather than local ice pressure as relates to local design for fixed structural areas on the platform. A strong scaling effect is observed in which the average global strength of ice decreases as the nominal area of contact increases. There is a lack of observed ice strength data for interactions involving failure of iceberg ice at large contact areas; a consequence of which is that there is not consensus in industry regarding the most appropriate strength model to use. While ISO 19906 presents a probabilistic model that accounts for variance in ice strength as contact area increases, with random coefficients to account for the variance between impacts, use of a minimum pressure cut-off for large areas is suggested due to the lack of ice strength data for large contact areas. ISO 19906 does not give guidance on the selection of the cut-off. A review of relevant data is presented here and different models for the minimum pressure cut-off considered, with example calculations presented.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 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) | 0,003 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».