MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stress Corrosion Cracking in Pipeline Steels

2013· article· en· W2015738546 on OpenAlexafffund
A. Plumtree, S.B. Lambert

Bibliographic record

VenueKey engineering materials · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceCorrosionStress corrosion crackingStress (linguistics)Superposition principleMetallurgyCrackingFracture (geology)Structural engineeringComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clusters of fine stress corrosion cracks on the external surface of buried steel natural gas pipelines in contact with groundwater have been examined and studied. The growth rates of transgranular stress corrosion cracks have been modeled and determined by conducting laboratory tests under similar conditions to those recorded in practice. The steel samples were immersed in an anaerobic dilute, near neutral solution with an open circuit potential for various times under stress. Metallographic examination of the resulting stress corrosion cracks was then conducted. Transgranular fracture, similar to that observed in the field, was observed following tests carried out under low frequency cycling in combination with a high stress ratio (R= minimum load/maximum load). A quantitative relationship between the frequency and stress ratio was developed giving crack growth rates similar to those observed in practice. Also, a superposition model was developed and applied to the experimental data which gave very good agreement between the actual and predicted crack growth rates. Applying the superposition model to the operating natural gas pipeline data showed that realistic predictions of crack growth result when taking interaction of the cracks into account.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKey engineering materialsSame topicStructural Integrity and Reliability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207