MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2183618616 · doi:10.1115/omae2015-42218

Finite Element Modeling of Large Diameter Monopiles in Dense Sand for Offshore Wind Turbine Foundations

2015· article· en· W2183618616 on OpenAlexaff
Sheikh Sharif Ahmed, Bipul Hawlader, Kshama Roy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOffshore wind powerTurbineFinite element methodGeotechnical engineeringFoundation (evidence)PileDeformation (meteorology)Hardening (computing)Stress (linguistics)Displacement (psychology)Mohr–Coulomb theoryStructural engineeringSubmarine pipelineGeologyEngineeringMaterials scienceMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With increasing demand of energy, attention to the alternative sources of sustainable energy is getting priority over the last decades. Offshore wind turbine is one of them. The most widely used foundation system for the wind turbine is the monopile, which is a large diameter single pile. In the present study, three-dimensional finite element (FE) analyses are performed to evaluate the capacity of large diameter monopiles in dense sand using the Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE) approach available in Abaqus/Explicit FE software. The behavior of sand is modeled using the Mohr-Coulomb (MC) and a modified Mohr-Coulomb (MMC) model where the pre-peak hardening, post-peak softening and the effects of mean effective stress and relative density on stress-strain behavior of dense sand are considered. Comparison with physical model test results shows that the MMC model can simulate better the load-displacement response than that with the MC model. The mechanisms involved in soil deformation are also explained using FE results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207