MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899291362 · doi:10.4043/29157-ms

Physical Model Testing for Supporting Ice Force Model Development of DP Vessels in Managed Ice

2018· article· en· W2899291362 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

VenueOTC Arctic Technology Conference · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSea iceIce fieldLead (geology)Ice divideGeologyIce coreMarine engineeringSea ice thicknessEnvironmental scienceEngineeringArctic ice packClimatologyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The stationkeeping performance prediction of a Dynamic Positioning (DP) vessel greatly depends on the accurate modelling of the ice forces, which in turn depends on managed ice field characteristics (ice concentration, floe thickness, floe size, ice drift speed and direction and inclusion of brash ice and small ice pieces) and the DP system characteristics (DP gain set-ups, control algorithms etc.). Physical model testing is a key tool in understanding and validating the fundamental relationships between the ice environmental parameters and the dynamics of a DP vessel. The National Research Council's Ocean Coastal and River Engineering Research Centre (NRC-OCRE) has conducted two comprehensive series of experiments with one 1/40 scaled and one 1/19 scaled DP vessels, in various realistic managed ice conditions in the ice tank facility in early 2015 and in early 2018, respectively. The primary objective of the model testing programs was to generate a database on managed ice-DP vessel interactions, which was the core to NRC-OCRE's ice force model development and validation activities. This paper describes the model test planning, preparation of managed ice field, the procedure of the model tests and the methodologies of data analysis for the two model testing programs. In both programs, the physical and mechanical characteristics of the ice field were modelled by controlling ice concentration, ice thickness, floe size, ice strength and the ice drift speed and direction. The ice concentration ranged from a light condition (7/10th) to a very heavy condition (9/10th+) with multiple ice floe sizes ranging between 12.5m to 100m. Multiple ice thicknesses ranging between 0.4m to 2m were used for multiple ice drift speeds (0.2 knots, 0.5 knots, and 1.2 knots) with various moderate to extreme ice encroachment angles. Ice forces were not measured directly but estimated based on the thrusters’ response. In addition, model's 6-DOF motions and accelerations were recorded. Multiple high definition cameras were used to capture the global and local ice-structure interactions both placed in above water and underwater locations. For the 2018 testing program, a new ceiling based video system was introduced that captured the images of the ice basin at multiple overlapping locations, which were processed offline to obtain time sequence full image of the ice basin. Model testing results for a few representative cases are presented in this article. The DP system used in the testing demonstrated capabilities of the vessel in maintaining station for majority of test cases. The measurements as well as the videos showed complex and highly stochastic ice-ship-boundary wall interactions, particularly for high oblique cases. The data and video captured provided sufficient information for developing novel ice force models for real time applications.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.811

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.226 · 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