MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2286301933

Non-Linear Finite Elements Simulations of Level Ice Forces on Offshore Structures Using a Multi Surface Failure Criterion

2003· article· en· W2286301933 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Petter Martonen, Ahmed Derradji-Aouat, Mauri Määttänen, G. A. Surkov

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringFinite element methodParametric statisticsIndentationConical surfaceGeologyIce sheetMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringMechanicsEngineeringMathematicsPhysicsComposite material
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Finite elements simulations of indentation loads caused by an ice sheet on a rigid conical offshore structure were carried out using the ANSYS structural commercial code (www.ansys. com). A square level ice sheet (20.0 m x 20.0 m) pushing a 10 m waterline diameter water cone was considered as the engineering application. The interactions between the structure and the ice sheet were modeled using a nonlinear 3-D contact element formulation. The mechanical behaviour of ice (constitutive model for ice) is elastic, while its failure was modeled using a multi surface failure criterion. The latter includes the effects of the strain (loading) rate, temperature, salinity and porosity on the magnitude of ice strength. During the simulations, failed elements (i.e. elements that satisfy the stress conditions of failure criterion) were taken out from the initial geometry of the ice sheet. Therefore, the process and sequence for breaking ice pieced from the original ice sheet were modeled. This was achieved via developing and ANSYS macro (routine) for element death numerical technique. The validation of the numerical model is presented. The validation was achieved by comparing the computed ice loads from the numerical simulations with full-scale ice load measurements obtained form the Kemi-I test cone (Määttänen et al., 1996). In addition to the validation, the results of sensitivity and parametric analyses are presented and discussed. Conclusions and recommendations are provided.

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207