MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983201287 · doi:10.4043/23731-ms

Numerical Pipe/Soil Interaction Modelling: Sensitivity Study and Extension to Ice Gouging

2012· article· en· W1983201287 on OpenAlexaff
Kenton Pike, Shawn Kenny

Bibliographic record

VenueOTC Arctic Technology Conference · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringOblique caseGeologyContext (archaeology)Displacement (psychology)MechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In predicting the geotechnical constraint against pipeline movement usingfinite element methods, the treatment of the pipe/soil interface contactbehavior is of utmost importance, especially in the tangential direction. Thisstudy focuses on the interpretation of soil resistance to axial pipe movementin cohesive soil material for oblique loading, specifically the effect ofchanging the interface shear stress limit and friction coefficient. The mainfinding of the present study is that the incorporation of a shear stress limitin the definition of tangential shear behavior has a considerable effect on theaxial pipeline reaction forces. Without the shear stress limit, the maximumaxial forces due to oblique pipe movement are effectively doubled in comparisonto a limit equal to half of the undrained shear strength. A simple analyticalmethod is provided to estimate the maximum oblique axial soil resistance inundrained conditions. The effect of changing the assumed frictional behavior isalso discussed with respect to predicting the soil reaction forces acting on anice keel during an undrained gouging event in cohesive soil. Introduction Pipeline systems, that are surficial or buried, may be subject to obliquegeotechnical loads as a result of large deformation geohazards, pipelineout-of-straightness and uneven seabed terrain. The geotechnical restraintagainst oblique pipe movement is a function of soil type and strength, burialdepth, oblique displacement angle, contact mechanics, and soil strainlocalization among other parameters. Properly accounting for the mechanicalbehavior at the pipe/soil contact interface is a critical aspect in estimatingthe forces exerted on the pipe during oblique displacement. In the context ofice keel/soil/pipeline interaction, it is equally important to capture thecorrect behavior at the ice keel/soil interface, as this will affect thecharacterization of the geotechnical loads imposed on the pipeline system. Further complexity is introduced as the pipeline mechanical response isdependent on the ice keel bearing pressure, subgouge soil deformation and axialpipeline feed-in. This study focuses on pipeline/soil interaction inthree-dimensional continuum form to examine the effect that the definition ofinterface contact properties has on axial interaction forces; the effect onlateral interaction forces has been previously studied (Pike and Kenny, 2011b,2012a). In this study, the Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian (ALE) method(Abaqus/Explicit) is used to study oblique lateral-axial pipe/soil interaction. The coupled Eulerian Lagrangian (CEL) method is used to simulate ice keel/soilinteraction. The geotechnical constraint in each case is discussed with respectto the applied contact interface properties. This paper presents some preliminary analysis suggesting that there isuncertainty in predicting the axial geotechnical restraint against obliquelateral-axial pipe movement. The results show that the inclusion of a shearstress limit at the pipe/soil interface can reduce the interaction forcessignificantly. Further work is necessary to calibrate and validate thenumerical modeling procedures. A physical testing program will be carried outto assess relatively simple pipe/soil interaction scenarios to examine contactmechanics and interface behavior in greater detail. The outcomes from thislaboratory testing and physical modelling program will be used to assess andadvance the capabilities of advanced numerical methods such as ALE to accountfor contact mechanics, strain localization and soil failure mechanisms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOTC Arctic Technology ConferenceSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207