Pipeline plough performance in sand waves. Part 2: kinematic calculation method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Offshore pipelines can be buried in the seabed by ploughing a trench, placing the pipe at its base, and then backfilling. The presence of sand waves or megaripples on the seabed surface can affect the progress of the plough and prevent the plough from generating a level trench with a uniform trench depth. A calculation method has been presented that makes assumptions about the motion of the plough to predict the kinematics of ploughs through regions of nonuniform seabeds. Results from the calculation methodology are compared with those from small-scale model tests with good agreement, and the detailed kinematics of ploughs are then examined. The calculation method suggests that as a plough moves through a sand-wave field, the oscillation of the plough about the skids results in the trench base being formed alternately by the share tip and heel. The new method allows prediction of likely offshore plough performance given known plough geometry, sand wavelength, and wave amplitude and may be used as a tool for assessing the feasibility of pipeline ploughing in zones of sand waves or megaripples.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".