A Parametric Study on the Strain Concentration in Field Joint of Concrete Coated Pipelines Using Finite Element Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims at investigating the strain concentration in the field joints of concrete coated pipelines. A parametric study, using the finite element (FE) method, is conducted to investigate the effect of different geometric and material related parameters on the strain concentration. The selected parameters are believed to be the most influencing ones, and their variations selected as such, so to reflect practical situations. The finite element approach used in this study was discussed and validated by the authors in their earlier work. In this study, twenty three FE models are analyzed and their results are processed and presented in terms of variation of Strain Concentration Factor (SCF) versus the considered parameters, thus enabling us to examine the trend of variation of SCF with respect to each parameter. The observed trends and their underlying mechanics are described. Furthermore, a non-dimensional “geometric parameter” is introduced, which lumps the geometrical parameters investigated into a single parameter, such that it could adequately describe the variations of SCF. It is observed that a threshold exists for this parameter, beyond which the SCF can be deemed constant for design purposes, and below which the SCF would become very sensitive to the geometrical properties.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".