Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optimised design of overhead transmission lines requires the selection of appropriate stringing tensions for conductors. The percentage of rated-tensile-strength and tension-over-mass criteria for determining these stringing tensions are discussed and analysed in terms of the static tensile stresses in the aluminium component of the conductor. It is demonstrated that the CIGRÉ tension-over-mass method of specifying vibration constraints does not maintain constant initial aluminium stress for conductors with various steel-to-aluminium ratios in all climates. In place of methods based on a percentage of rated strength or the tension-over-mass method, it is proposed that vibration constraints be based on specified values of static tensile aluminium stress. The ‘aluminium-stress method’ may be applied by specifying a stress constraint in a sag-tension program that is equipped to apply one. If such a program is not available to a line engineer, a simple method is provided for computing the initial tension constraint based on the steel and aluminium areas, the average temperature of the coldest month and specified constraints on initial aluminium stress and built-in stress. The effect of built-in stresses on initial stringing tensions is discussed.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".