MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996606481 · doi:10.1115/1.2894294

Failure of X52 Wrinkled Pipelines Subjected to Monotonic Axial Deformation

2008· article· en· W1996606481 on OpenAlexafffund
Y. Zhang, Sreekanta Das

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pressure Vessel Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInternal pressureDeformation (meteorology)Finite element methodMaterials scienceParametric statisticsPipeline (software)Structural engineeringRotational symmetryFailure mode and effects analysisNumerical analysisComposite materialMechanicsEngineeringMathematicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was undertaken to investigate and understand the behavior of a wrinkled energy pipeline when subjected to sustained monotonic axial compressive deformation. This study involved both experimental and numerical investigations. Two full-scale laboratory tests with moderate and high internal pressures on X52 grade steel pipes with a diameter-to-thickness ratio of 45 show that this pipeline is extremely ductile and did not rupture under axisymmetric compressive axial deformation. However, they fail due to the excessive cross-sectional deformation and the final deformed shape looks like an accordion due to the formation of multiple wrinkles. Subsequently, a detailed parametric study using a numerical technique was undertaken to determine the failure condition and failure mode of this pipeline for various realistic internal pressures and diameter-to-thickness ratios. A nonlinear finite element method was used for the numerical study. The numerical model was validated with the data obtained from the two full-scale tests. The parametric study shows that the X52 linepipe loses its integrity due to the rupture in the pipe wall if the internal pressure is low and/or if the pipe has a small diameter-to-thickness ratio. This paper presents and discusses the results obtained both from the experimental and numerical parametric studies.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.218
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pressure Vessel TechnologySame topicFluid Dynamics and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207