MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095735239 · doi:10.1115/omae2008-57398

Assessment of Thermal Protection of Life Rafts in Passenger Vessel Abandonment Situations

2008· article· en· W2095735239 on OpenAlex
Lawrence Mak, Andrew Kuczora, Michel B. Ducharme, James O. Boone, Rob Brown, B. Farnworth, Kerri-Ann Evely, Fabien A. Basset, Scott N. MacKinnon

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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOffshore Engineering and Technologies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandDefence Research and Development CanadaNational Research Council Canada
FundersTransport Canada
KeywordsAbandonment (legal)Environmental scienceRaftMarine engineeringEngineeringAeronautics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inflatable life rafts are currently used on almost all passenger, fishing and commercial vessels, and offshore oil installations. Worldwide, life rafts are the primary evacuation system from fishing vessels with relatively small crews to large Roll on/Roll off passenger vessels with over a thousand passengers and crew. While International Maritime Organization (IMO) standards currently require inflatable life raft components to “provide insulation” or “be sufficiently insulated”, there are no performance criteria for these requirements (IMO, 1996). In a passenger ship abandonment situation in cold water, passengers may be wearing very little personal protective clothing. Therefore, life rafts provide the only significant thermal protection against the cold ocean environment while they await rescue. Manufacturers equip life rafts with an insulated floor to reduce heat loss from direct contact with the cold ocean water. The insulation provided is critically important for life raft occupants who have little protective clothing. The heat loss of unprotected persons is drastically increased if there is a layer of water on the floor as would likely be the case when someone climbs into the life raft from the ocean or if water is splashed into the life raft in heavy weather. Experiments were conducted in mild cold (16°C water temperature and 19°C air temperature) and cold conditions (5°C water temperature and 5°C air temperature) to assess the thermal protection of a 16-person, Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) approved, commercially available life raft. This paper presents results in the mild cold condition only. It has been found that the wave height effect may be ignored as a first approximation to reduce the number of environmental variables because the results demonstrated that wave height effect is less important with leeway. Heat conductance decreases considerably with floor inflation. Heat conductance is about the same with floor inflated 50% and 100%. The CO2 concentration in the 11-person test exceeded 5000 ppm in less than an hour inside the life raft, with closed canopy and no active ventilation. This hostile microclimate inside the life raft suggests that active ventilation at a known rate is required to keep the CO2 level at a safe controlled level when longer duration tests are to be conducted in the future. Wet clothing has a significant effect on occupant heat loss.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.721
Threshold uncertainty score0.245

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOffshore Engineering and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207