MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2775225530 · doi:10.5957/josr.170046

Balancing a Destroyer on a Wave for Strength and Stability

2017· article· en· W2775225530 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ship Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicShip Hydrodynamics and Maneuverability
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStability (learning theory)SeakeepingHydrostatic equilibriumCrestWave heightEngineeringRogue waveStructural engineeringMarine engineeringMechanicsHullGeologyComputer scienceNonlinear systemPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A wave-balancing approach, where a ship is hydrostatically balanced on a wave with either the crest or the trough at midship, is often used to assess the inherent strength and stability of the vessel in waves. This work examines the differences between the wave types (sinusoidal and trochoidal) as well as the values of wave length, wave height, and position of the crest along the ship, with the goal of looking for the worst-case conditions for both intact stability and longitudinal strength. A notional destroyer is used as a case study to look at the trends in strength and stability in the upright condition and at angles of heel in waves. The notional destroyer is intentionally similar to but not the same as any existing design. The study shows that looking at a wider set of wave conditions and ship states can identify more extreme wave loading and stability degradation, suggesting that this more detailed analysis would be beneficial as a standard practice. 1. Introduction Both stability and longitudinal strength are key factors in a successful ship design. In both cases, it has long been recognized that the hydrostatic and hydrodynamic effects of waves are fundamentally important. Before the advent of computers and modern numerical models and methods, naval architects relied on hydrostatic analysis to determine the stability and strength characteristics of a given vessel. They typically added safety margins to account for other influences including wave dynamics. Some, however, used the method of "balancing a ship on a wave" to partially account for the influence of waves. In this methodology, the vessel was hydrostatically balanced on the crest or in the trough of a wave. The method was used first for finding bending moments, and later some experts used the method for assessing the stability of a ship. Although the method does not account for the dynamics of ship motion or hull loading transients, it is still used as a design tool today and is embedded in standards for strength (Lloyd's Register, NSR 2012) and stability (BV 1030-1 2012). It does give a "snapshot" of the hydrostatic forces and moments for a particular condition.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.332
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.240 · 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