MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984890718 · doi:10.1115/ipc2006-10101

Calculation of Strains in Dents Based on High Resolution In-Line Caliper Survey

2006· article· en· W1984890718 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 2: Integrity Management; Poster Session; Student Paper Competition · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Destructive Testing Techniques
Canadian institutionsTransCanada (Canada)Calgary Laboratory ServicesUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalipersFinite element methodCurvatureStructural engineeringBendingShell (structure)Computer scienceEngineeringEngineering drawingMechanical engineeringMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The strain level in a deformed pipe wall has been included in recent years in the assessment of severity of dents in order to better prioritize and effectively repair mechanical damage in pipelines. High resolution caliper data provide accurate dent shape that can be used for determination of strains using commercial Finite Element Method (FEM) programs. However, those programs, designed to solve a variety of general problems, are very inefficient in calculation of strains in a pipewall with known radial displacements. This paper presents a very efficient method that combines analytical techniques with FEM approach. After properly filtering the caliper measurements the bending strain is calculated from the pipewall curvature, and the membrane strain is obtained using a FEM shell model that includes nodes with only two degrees of freedom in the mid-plane of the wall.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.252 · 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