MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735674332 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2016-0468

Slope stability evaluation of iron ore fines during marine transport in bulk carriers

2017· article· en· W2735674332 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michael C. Munro, Abbas Mohajerani

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRMIT University
KeywordsIron oreGeotechnical engineeringShear strength (soil)Shear (geology)GeologyEnvironmental scienceMining engineeringMetallurgyMaterials sciencePetrologySoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A commodity, such as iron ore fines, shifting in the hold of a bulk carrier can lead to the vessel listing or capsizing. The objective of this study is to investigate the factors of safety pertaining to slope failure for both untrimmed and trimmed cargoes of iron ore fines during marine transportation. To determine the shear strength parameters needed to perform this analysis, triaxial testing was performed on samples of iron ore fines under varying densities and moisture contents. Using the shear strength parameters of the material, the Morgenstern–Price method of slices and infinite slope analysis, referred to as rotational and translational slope stability analyses, were used to determine the factors of safety against slope failure. The study concludes that, considering a factor of safety of 1.5, an untrimmed cargo of iron ore fines is unstable at angles of heel that bulk carriers are expected to experience during a typical voyage. If the cargo is trimmed it is shown to be significantly more stable. Results support the recommendation that it become mandatory for cargoes of iron ore fines to undergo trimming to reduce the chance of slope failure occurring, which may result in the loss of human life and industry assets.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207