MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043546944 · doi:10.1115/ipc2008-64389

An Overland-Hydrographical Spill Model and Its Application to Pipeline Consequence Modeling

2008· article· en· W2043546944 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsDynamic Systems Analysis (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePipeline transportPipeline (software)Environmental scienceTerrainMarine engineeringSimulationEngineeringEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hazardous liquid transmission via large diameter pipelines relies on the integrity of the pipeline system. An accidental loss of containment at any point along the pipeline can result in widely ranging environmental impacts depending on local geography, as well as design and operational parameters. Instead of “Rule of Thumb”, a state-of-the-art consequence assessment may require a robust and comprehensive computer tool to effectively prioritize areas for maintenance and mitigation, as well as to develop an appropriate spill response plan. An approach for quantifying the consequences associated with a liquid spill has been developed and described. The results are used in a consequence analysis by computing the estimated costs for response and environmental damage based on the outflow volumes and environmental factors. This is further incorporated into a risk analysis to provide an illustration of the probability and severity of a failure along the pipeline. The final results may be used as an aid in response training, contingency planning, and prevention and mitigation strategies. The basis of the consequence analysis is a transient three-dimensional (3-D) overland-hydrographical spill simulation package, which has been developed to model the trajectory of a liquid spill. The spill simulation package is an in-house VBA extension of ArcGIS™ that uses a digital elevation model to determine the flow path of a spill. The spill model includes three modules: the oil trajectory simulation module, which predicts pooling and the primary direction of oil spreading; the physical module, which determines the transient rate of spreading and pooling, the depth of infiltration into soil, the width of the lateral spread and other parameters that are concerned; and a module that detects the boundaries of land/water transitions. A description is provided of the procedures that were established to programmatically plot the extent of the impact in ArcGIS™. In addition, a hydrographical flow model is described which determines the amount of contaminant entering any stationary or non-stationary water bodies that may intersect with the spill and which displays the potential impact area over the water within the emergency response time. The paper outlines how the spill simulation package is integrated with a cost analysis module, which is applied to determine the estimated clean-up costs for the contaminated area on land and water. An illustration is provided as to how an iterative calculation procedure can be set up to model spill consequences at each potential failure site along the pipe centerline. Using this procedure, high consequence pipe segments are identified and highlighted and are overlaid on the GIS map to identify those areas where a spill will have the greatest impact. This enables the development of a quantitative consequence profile which may then be used as part of a quantitative risk assessment and/or to aid in proactive engineering design, maintenance, mitigation and response optimization.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.282
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.228 · 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