Pull-in force predictions for horizontal directional drilling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Horizontal directional drilling is a ‘trenchless technology' that has been used successfully to install pipelines with minimal surface disruption. It has been developed to such an extent that pipelines 2·5 km long and with diameters approaching 2000 mm have been installed, and it has the potential to install pipelines over even greater distances. A study has been undertaken to investigate the use of horizontal directional drilling to create conduits capable of housing electrical cables over long distances (arbitrarily taken as 10 km). This paper presents the results of an investigation into the pull-in forces associated with long-distance horizontal directional drilling installations with different pipe diameters using the Pipe-force 2005 model. The outcomes of the study suggest that if the creation of the borepath can be controlled adequately, then it is theoretically conceivable that pipes of 600 mm diameter could be installed over the maximum distance considered in this project using conventional drilling rigs. However, if the borepath deviates from the desired line and level, or partial borehole collapse occurs, the pull-in force required to install the pipe would increase to a level that would jeopardise installation with currently available equipment.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".