Nonlinear Finite Element Simulations of Ice Sheet Forces on Conical Structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present paper deals with interaction between an ice sheet and fixed, conical structures. The ice sheet as well as the structure is discretizied by finite elements. The interaction between the ice sheet and the conical structure is simulated using a special contact algorithm which makes it possible to follow the gradually developing contact between the ice sheet and structure. As the configuration of the ice sheet changes during the interaction process, the buoyancy forces changes accordingly. This process is traced by introducing a continuous nonlinear foundation model to include the effects of buoyancy forces and specific weight of the ice. The mechanical behavior of ice is approximated using two different constitutive models. In the first material model the ice is treated as an isotropic, brittle material, while in the second model the ice is considered being a transversal isotropic, brittle material. When the state of stress at a material point in the ice reaches the failure surface, cracking or crushing is said to occur. After cracking or crushing, the post peak behavior of the ice is approximated as a rigid plastic material. The results obtained during the finite element simulations are compared with analytical methods for calculation of ice sheet forces on conical structures.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".