MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964802221 · doi:10.1139/l09-160

Dynamic response of transmission lines guyed towers under wind loading

2010· article· en· W1964802221 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVibration and Dynamic Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsTowerStructural engineeringTransmission lineTransient responseResponse analysisElectric power transmissionCurrent (fluid)Transient (computer programming)Line (geometry)Transmission towerDynamic loadingEngineeringComputer scienceMathematicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The importance of the dynamic response of guyed towers for transmission lines (TLs) under wind loading is evaluated in this article. The objective is to verify if the simplified static-equivalent approach provided in the current TL codes is sufficient for this type of flexible tower. As a comparison, transient dynamic (TD) analyses were performed. Two different guyed tower configurations were investigated: (i) the direct current (DC) line and (ii) the alternating current (AC) line. Loading cases considering bare and iced TL structures were studied. It was found that, depending on the guyed tower configuration and the loading case, the static-equivalent approach may underestimate the possible dynamic response. In addition, a simplified method that allows a better prediction of the dynamic effects is proposed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.409
Threshold uncertainty score0.760

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.184 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it