MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084516942 · doi:10.1115/omae2008-57473

Design Through Simulation: Finite Element Capabilities for Ocean Engineering

2008· article· en· W2084516942 on OpenAlexaff
Dean M. Steinke, Ryan S. Nicoll, Bradley J. Buckham

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOffshore Engineering and Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaDynamic Systems Analysis (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemotely operated underwater vehicleInstrumentation (computer programming)Marine engineeringMooringEngineeringComputer scienceFinite element methodNonlinear systemRemotely operated vehicleSimulationSystems engineeringControl engineeringAerospace engineeringStructural engineeringMobile robotRobot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Design optimization and testing of marine technology and offshore structures, such as risers, moorings, or manned and unmanned submersibles is a challenge. This is due to many factors including weather, costly ship time, and the need for experienced off-shore personnel. Nevertheless, early stage design optimization is critical to a project’s success. There is a need for simulation facilities that can capture the complexity and the non-linear dynamics of large mechanical and structural systems, and provide accurate assessment of design variations. This article outlines the development of a nonlinear simulation tool for modeling mechanical systems and structures in the ocean. The framework design and simulation set-up procedures are discussed. The main components of the simulator, a nonlinear finite element cable model and a rigid body model, are discussed. Next, this paper shows how these fundamental models are used to simulate risers, remotely operated vehicle (ROV) umbilicals, and mooring lines. In addition, a module that produces the effects of vortex induced vibration (VIV) based on recent developments on the wake oscillator model is presented. Payin and payout simulations of a ROV tether are also presented to demonstrate the use of the variable-length capabilities of the cable model. Lastly, this paper discusses how ROV instrumentation can be simulated, permitting the design and refinement of instrumentation processing algorithms, such as a Kalman filter, or controllers.

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 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOffshore Engineering and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207