Marginal and total exceedance probabilities of environmental contours

Mackay, Ed; Haselsteiner, Andreas F.

doi:10.1016/j.marstruc.2020.102863

Cited by 34 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition to the separation of the contour methods based on the method for defining the joint distribution, this separation also respects the difference in terms of the method used for constructing the environmental contour from the joint distribution. Various contour construction methods are discussed and compared in [29]. As is mentioned above, the parametric contour methods under study in the current work use the I-FORM contour construction approach.…”

Section: Selected Contour Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The non-parametric contour method under study uses the HDC method for contour construction. As is discussed in [29], the use of these differing contour construction methods leads to a difference in the interpretation of the contours themselves. The implications of these interpretive differences are not examined in the current work, as contours utilizing various construction methods are regularly compared directly for use in regular engineering practice.…”

Section: Selected Contour Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the method for finding the empirical contour of the data has some sensitivity to tuning parameters, the contour is a reliable estimate of the area covered by the n-year data set. It is important to note that this method of contour construction also differs from the various underlying contour construction methods described for each of the contour methods under study (see, e.g., [29] for an excellent discussion on the exceedance probabilities of differing contour construction methods).…”

Section: Predictive Accuracymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The I-FORM method is compared to a method developed using inverse second order reliability method (I-SORM) for generating environmental contours of extreme sea states in [28]. Additionally, contour construction methods are rigorously described and compared in [29]. A useful survey of methods, including a detailed explanation of the theoretical basis for different contour methods and practical guidance, was performed by Ross et al [30].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Development of a Comparison Framework for Evaluating Environmental Contours of Extreme Sea States

Eckert

Martin

Coe

et al. 2020

JMSE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental contours of extreme sea states are often utilized for the purposes of reliability-based offshore design. Many methods have been proposed to estimate environmental contours of extreme sea states, including, but not limited to, the traditional inverse first-order reliability method (I-FORM) and subsequent modifications, copula methods, and Monte Carlo methods. These methods differ in terms of both the methodology selected for defining the joint distribution of sea state parameters and in the method used to construct the environmental contour from the joint distribution. It is often difficult to compare the results of proposed methods to determine which method should be used for a particular application or geographical region. The comparison of the predictions from various contour methods at a single site and across many sites is important to making environmental contours of extreme sea states useful in practice. The goal of this paper is to develop a comparison framework for evaluating methods for developing environmental contours of extreme sea states. This paper develops generalized metrics for comparing the performance of contour methods to one another across a collection of study sites, and applies these metrics and methods to develop conclusions about trends in the wave resource across geographic locations, as demonstrated for a pilot dataset. These proposed metrics and methods are intended to judge the environmental contours themselves relative to other contour methods, and are thus agnostic to a specific device, structure, or field of application. The metrics developed and applied in this paper include measures of predictive accuracy, physical validity, and aggregated temporal performance that can be used to both assess contour methods and provide recommendations for the use of certain methods in various geographical regions. The application and aggregation of the metrics proposed in this paper outline a comparison framework for environmental contour methods that can be applied to support design analysis workflows for offshore structures. This comparison framework could be extended in future work to include additional metrics of interest, potentially including those to address issues pertinent to a specific application area or analysis discipline, such as metrics related to structural response across contour methods or additional physics-based metrics based on wave dynamics.

show abstract

Section: Selected Contour Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Selected Contour Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Predictive Accuracymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Development of a Comparison Framework for Evaluating Environmental Contours of Extreme Sea States

Eckert

Martin

Coe

et al. 2020

JMSE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Circles show environmental conditions that must be considered based on the three load cases. Note that H s50 does not necessarily coincide with the highest point along the contour in a 50-year IFORM contour, but that it depends on the order of the variable transformation [6].…”

Section: Events Considered Independentmentioning

confidence: 99%