Effectiveness of Viscoelastic Models for Prediction of Tensile Axial Strains during Cyclic Loading of High-Density Polyethylene Pipe
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipelines are commonly installed using horizontal directional drilling (HDD), a trenchless construction technique used to replace or expand underground pipelines which generates cyclic axial forces on the pipe. To evaluate the ability of existing linear and nonlinear viscoelastic models to predict HDPE pipe response during this cyclic loading, calculations of axial strain are compared with the laboratory measurements. The linear viscoelastic and nonlinear viscoelastic models provide reasonable estimates of the maximum strain levels during installation; however, maximum strains were underestimated by the linear viscoelastic model and overestimated by the nonlinear viscoelastic model. During periods of strain reversal, both models overestimated the amount of axial strain recovery. A parametric study showed how the magnitude of these strains depends on the peak stress during each cycle, the number of cycles, and the period of time stresses are applied. The work also quantifies how increases in peak stress and the number of cycles increase the maximum axial strain. Conventional creep functions can provide reasonable conservative estimations of the maximum strain during a HDD installation provided that the maximum pulling force is known.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it