MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7119478234 · doi:10.3929/ethz-c-000790066

Centrifuge modelling of an OWT monopile foundation in saturated sand subjected to cyclic dynamic storm loading

2025· other· en· W7119478234 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Παναγιώτα Τασιοπούλου, Taxiarchoula G. Limnaiou, Lampros Sakellariadis, Jacob Chacko, Liam Alexander Jones, Athanasios Agalianos, Ioannis Anastasopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueRepository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCentrifugeFoundation (evidence)Offshore wind powerTurbineDynamic loadingStorm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Novel centrifuge tests of an Offshore Wind Turbine (OWT) monopile foundation were recently conducted using the 500gton capacity beam centrifuge at the ETH Zurich (ETHZ) Geotechnical Centrifuge Center (GCC). The goal of these tests is twofold: (i) to investigate soil drainage conditions under cyclic storm loading, which are critical in the design and performance of OWT monopile foundations; and (ii) to produce a first-of-its-kind set of high quality, well documented experiments that can be used for validation of advanced numerical models and design optimization. The model was built in a rigid cylindrical box, containing saturated Ottawa sand with Dr ≈ 75% and a steel monopile with an embedded length over diameter (L/D) ratio of 3.75. Tested at a centrifugal acceleration of 60g, the monopile was subjected to load-controlled lateral cyclic dynamic loading, applied to the top of the monopile using a custom-designed hydraulic actuator. The paper discusses the design of the centrifuge experiments and the preparation of the model, along with some preliminary results of the lateral cyclic dynamic tests. Selected results are compared to blind predictions made by GR8 GEO prior to testing.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRepository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich)French-language works237,207