Parameters Affecting the Buckling and Post-Buckling Behaviour of High Strength Pipelines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using the finite element methods, a parametric study was conducted to examine the influence of pipeline diameter, internal pressure, girth weld offset misalignment amplitude and modeled length on the local buckling of high strength pipelines. The numerical procedures were calibrated from full-scale tests on high strength pipelines subject to internal pressure and end rotation. The peak moment decreased with increasing pressure and girth weld offset misalignment amplitude. The limit curvature increased with increasing pressure and decreased with increasing girth weld offset misalignment amplitude. The effect of reducing the modeled pipeline segment length, from 5.5 D to 3.5 D, was to increase the limit curvature at the peak moment and to delay the onset of nonlinear ovalization response to higher curvature amplitudes. The influence of girth weld offset misalignment on the local buckling response was examined in terms of a strain capacity reduction parameter known as the girth weld factor. This study has determined current practice, based on DNV OS-F101 standard, was appropriate; moreover, the potential for reduction in this conservative approach is identified.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".