MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061497474 · doi:10.1115/ipc2002-27215

Composite Reinforced Line Pipe (CRLP) for Onshore Gas Pipelines

2002· article· en· W2061497474 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

Venue4th International Pipeline Conference, Parts A and B · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsTransCanada (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline transportWeldabilityPipeline (software)CorrosionComposite numberNatural gasPetroleum engineeringWeldingStructural engineeringMaterials scienceForensic engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineeringComposite materialWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been a general trend in the natural gas pipeline transmission industry towards high-pressure pipelines using higher strength steels. However, as the strength has been increased, so have issues of weldability and fracture control. TransCanada PipeLines has been developing and testing a hybrid product since 1996 called Composite Reinforced Line Pipe (CRLP®) to address these issues. This is a patented technology developed by NCF Industries and licensed on a worldwide basis to TransCanada PipeLines. CRLP® is composed of high performance, composite material reinforcing a proven high-strength, low alloy steel pipe. The composite reinforces the steel pipe in the hoop direction, thereby increasing its pressure carrying capacity, while providing a tough, corrosion-resistant coating. This paper discusses recent research work concerning the use of CRLP® for large-diameter gas pipeline systems. Aspects discussed include analysis and design methodologies, full-scale testing, and field trials.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.750
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.220 · 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