MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413391882 · doi:10.1115/omae2025-156062

Effects of Ice, Wind, Waves and Currents on Offshore Wind Turbines Destined for Atlantic Canada

2025· article· en· W4413391882 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ahmed Derradji-Aouat, Paul Stuckey, Mark Fuglem, Ian Turnbull

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsCentre For Cold Ocean Resources EngineeringNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOffshore wind powerWind powerSubmarine pipelineOceanographyGeologyMarine engineeringWind stressWind waveEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyGeographyEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Canadian provinces of Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) and Nova Scotia (NS) are conducting assessment studies to investigate the use of offshore wind turbines to generate electricity. This paper deals with numerical simulations of two 15 MW offshore monopiles wind turbines: One is located off the western coast of Newfoundland Island (in water depth of 45 m) and the other is located off the northern coast of Nova Scotia (in water depth of 60 m). The two monopiles are similar, each has a diameter of 10 m, a tower of 150 m high, and blades rotor diameter of 240m. The environmental conditions (ice, wind, waves and currents) are also fairly similar; however, the water depth is different. The objective of this work is to conduct numerical parametric analyses to investigate the effects of environmental conditions (ice, wind, waves, and currents) on the behaviour of the monopiles when operating in “production mode”. All simulations were carried out using an open-source code, called OpenFAST. The environmental parameters were obtained from a metocean investigation of the region. In this paper, including ice loads on the monopiles in offshore Atlantic Canada is a significant contribution to the literature. For the simulations, the ice thickness was varied between 0.5 m and 1.6 m, the wind speeds were varied from 10 m/s to 20 m/s, the wave heights were varied between 1.7 m to 4.9 m, and current speeds were varied from 0.05 m/s to 0.25 m/s. The results of the simulations are presented and discussed, and conclusions and recommendations are provided.

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 score0.398
Threshold uncertainty score0.801

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→