Ampacity Reduction Factors for Cables Crossing Thermally Unfavorable Regions
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When power cables cross regions with unfavorable thermal conditions, temperatures higher than the design value can occur. If the region is wide enough, the rating of the cable will usually be based on the assumption that the entire route is characterized by the same conditions. In a majority of cases, the unfavorable thermal environment will be very short, usually a few meters (e.g., street crossing). In these cases, the effect of the crossing is usually ignored. The conductor temperature in such cases may be much higher than in the remainder of the route, however, and cable derating is required. Analytical solutions are almost never used to determine the effect of unfavorable short sections of the route on the ampacity of the rated cable. The main reason no computations are performed is an absence of either derating formulas or derating tables (curves) and not the lack of a need. To fill this gap, an analytical solution for the computation of the derating factors has been developed and is presented in this paper. The solution is simple and accurate enough to be suitable for standardization purposes. A numerical example involving a pipe-type cable crossing a street is presented to show the effect of street crossings on the ampacity of the cable circuit. In this practical example, the ampacity of the pipe-type cable has to be derated considerably.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it