MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080001059 · doi:10.4043/24566-ms

Conical Structures in Ice: The Roles Friction, Slope and Shape Play

2014· article· en· W2080001059 on OpenAlex
Anne Barker, Denise Sudom, Mohamed Sayed

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueOTC Arctic Technology Conference · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConical surfaceGeologyBendingMechanicsBucklingGeometryGeotechnical engineeringStructural engineeringEngineeringPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Conical structures are often used to ameliorate the action of floating ice. There is a long history of using cone-shaped bridge piers. Moreover, many recent designs adopt downward-breaking cones to further reduce ice forces. The present work aims to clarify aspects of ice interaction with cones that are poorly understood. This work builds on a previous study that employed a numerical model of ice dynamics in order to predict ice failure patterns and forces on a conical structure. Performance of the model was validated against available ice basin tests, and the study examined a test case representing a pier of the Confederation Bridge, Canada. The present tests examine the roles of ice-structure friction and shape of the cone (upward- or downward-breaking) in more detail. Additionally, the effects of ice thickness and embedded consolidated ridges are examined. The results reveal trends of the dependence of the modes of ice failure and the resulting forces on ice-structure friction, slope and the type of the cone (upward- or downward-breaking). For upward-breaking cones, ice-structure friction proved to be more significant for gentler slopes than for steeper ones. For those cones, ice failure appeared to correspond to three-dimensional buckling. Downward-breaking cones displayed a different behavior with downwards bending failure. The value of the ice-structure friction coefficient had a clear influence on the forces for all downward-breaking cases. The results also support the idea that downward-breaking cones correspond to lower horizontal forces than those acting on upward-breaking cones. Concerning ice sheet thickness, peak horizontal ice forces show a near linear dependence on the thickness. For large consolidated ridges, forces increased substantially. The numerical model results are compared with the elastic beam bending approach given in the ISO 19906 Arctic Offshore Structures Standard for ice loading on a sloped structure. In order to use the equations in ISO 19906, assumptions must be made on the maximum accumulated rubble height and other parameters, which affect the calculated load. The peak loads from the model and ISO approach are similar for level ice interactions, although the ISO approach is more sensitive to ice-structure friction. Also, the ISO approach may overestimate the load generated by some ridge geometries.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.196 · 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