Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to examine solutions and challenges related to joining thermoset composite piping. Fiber reinforced polymers (FRP) have been used in piping systems for more than 40 years. Higher specific mechanical properties and corrosion resistance of FRP make them a potential candidate for replacing metallic piping structures. Despite the advantages associated with FRP, their application is still limited due to, in part, unsatisfactory methods for joining composite subcomponents and inadequate knowledge of failure mechanism under different loading conditions. Adhesively bonded joints are attractive for many applications since they offer integrated sealing, minimal part count and do not require pipe extremities with complex geometries such as threads or bell and spigot configurations. So far, the majority of work reported in the technical literature on adhesively bonded pipe joints is concerned with lap joints employing wrapping techniques to produce overlap sleeve connections. More recently, a joining technique was proposed that replaces the wrapping technique with filament-wound overlap sleeve couplers that are adhesively bonded to the pipe extremities. In the present article, various joining techniques for FRP piping through adhesive bonding are discussed, and damage mechanisms under different loading conditions are examined.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".