Analysis of Hydrodynamic Interaction Between HMCS FREDERICTON and USNS KANAWHA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract : HMCS FREDERICTON collided with USNS KANAWHA on 18 November 2010 while FREDERICTON was approaching KANAWHA for replenishment at sea. The ships were in calm water of depth greater than 600 m. VENTURE Naval Officers Training Centre (NOTC) requested that DRDC Atlantic investigate whether hydrodynamic interactions between the two ships contributed to the occurrence of the collision. It is unlikely that hydrodynamic interaction effects were a factor in causing a collision between FREDERICTON and KANAWHA. In the present report, the non-dimensional lateral separation is defined as the lateral separation distance divided by the beam of the larger ship. FREDERICTON and KANAWHA had a non-dimensional lateral separation of 3.0 when FREDERICTON commenced unexpected motion behaviour. Available data suggest that hydrodynamic interaction forces at the onset of unexpected motion behaviour were likely less than 10 percent of hydrodynamic interaction forces that would have been experienced when closer to the alongside refueling position. During replenishment operations, ships typically have forward speed Froude numbers less than 0.2. Under such conditions, wave-making effects will be small, simplifying analysis of flow conditions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".