An Approach to Sinkhole Prevention on Post Pipeline Construction at Trenchless Road Crossings
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Sinkholes manifest unpredictably at road crossings long after the completion of pipeline installation. In recent pipeline projects, Alberta Clipper Expansion and Line 4 Extension, over 1200 km of NPS 36 oil pipeline was constructed across Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. Over 600 road crossings were executed across these provinces utilizing standard industry crossing techniques and under a wide variety of soil conditions. Several months after construction, sinkholes appeared on roads at locations along the centerline of the newly constructed pipeline. It is hypothesized that bores which were observed to have been over-reamed, re-reamed, or had pipe pulled back, may have contributed in development of unconsolidated soil or “voids” in comparison to adjacent native subsurface soil, which then manifested into sinkholes. In other cases, the evolution of voids may have been attributed to pre-existing soil conditions. Since sinkholes pose safety concerns to the public as well as the integrity of the pipeline mitigation, control measures were taken to assess and remediate other locations prior to sinkhole manifestation. An approach to prevent sinkhole manifestation is identifying high-risk crossings, scanning for voids, and void remediation. Identification of high-risk sinkhole manifestation at crossings involved desktop evaluation which was based on: observations noted inspectors’ reports, geotechnical conditions, depth of crossings, the elevation difference between the entry and exit holes, and crossing method. Once prioritized, selected road crossings were scanned for voids using a technology called Ground-Penetrating Radar (GPR), which is the focus of this paper. Ground-penetrating radar employs a system of radio waves at various frequencies directed at the subsoil. The changing velocities between consolidated and unconsolidated soil provides different views of the subsurface. Factors such as pipeline depth, soil type, and interference, played a factor in the ability to accurately scan for voids. For remediation, the injection of polyurethane foam was used. This paper describes the approach, process, accuracy factors, and findings of Ground-penetrating radar used on pipeline projects.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».