MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3161947326 · doi:10.5957/icetech-2010-184

Converting An Icebreaker From An Oil Lubricated Stern Tube Bearing System To A Seawater Lubricated Stern Tube Bearing Considering Environmental And Operating Costs

2010· article· en· W3161947326 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ken J. Ogle, Craig D. Carter

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTechnology Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSternTube (container)Bearing (navigation)LubricantArcticPetroleum engineeringLubricationMarine engineeringShipyardEnvironmental scienceEngineeringGeologyWaste managementMechanical engineeringShipbuildingOceanographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Operational discharges of oil from the stern tube is a common occurrence for ice breakers as propellers are prone to impact from ice causing shafts to flex and seals are unable to maintain a complete barrier to keep seawater out or lubricating oil in the stern tube. Whereas solar radiation generally speeds the break-down of contaminants, the reduced level of sunlight in the Arctic lengthens the degradation process and increases the likelihood that toxic substances in the stern tube lubricating oil will find their way into the food chain. Hence, deemed “biodegradable” lubricants may not be as biodegradable in the Arctic operating environments. However, there exists a proven, viable option for vessels operating in the Arctic to eliminate stern tube oil pollution. This paper outlines the process for converting the sterntube bearings from oil-lubricated white-metal bearings to Thordon COMPAC seawater lubricated bearings, based on recent works on a twin screw ice breaker at a shipyard in Canada.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.212
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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTechnology Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207