End Boundary Effects on Local Buckling Response of High Strength Linepipe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, the significance of the length to diameter ratio (L/D) on the local buckling response was evaluated using continuum finite element modelling procedures. A numerical model was developed, using the finite-element simulator ABAQUS/Standard, to predict the local buckling and post-buckling response of high strength pipelines subject to combined state of loading. The numerical procedures were calibrated using test data from large-scale experiments examining the local buckling of high strength linepipe. The numerical model’s response was consistent with the measured experimental response for predicting the local buckling behavior well into the post-yield range. A parametric study was conducted to examine the significance of the linepipe L/D ratio with respect to the yield stress to ultimate stress ratio (Y/T) and hoop yield stress to longitudinal yield stress ratio or anisotropy factor (R). As the models with high L/D ratio exhibit global Euler-type response, a numerical algorithm was developed to calculate the local section moment response for the FE analysis. The analysis conducted provides insight on the significance of end effects on the local buckling response. There are questions on the approach taken by current industry practice with respect to establishing compressive strain limits for local buckling when using shorter linepipe segment lengths. The results from this study suggest end effects require assessment and potential mitigation.
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".