MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061823056 · doi:10.1115/ipc2014-33318

Use of Discrete Element Modeling to Capture the Effect of Backfill Particle Size on the Soil Restraints of Buried Pipelines Subjected to Lateral Ground Movement

2014· article· en· W2061823056 on OpenAlexaff
Sadana Dilrukshi, Dharma Wijewickreme

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline transportGeotechnical engineeringTrenchGround movementPipeline (software)Structural engineeringFinite element methodSoil structure interactionGeologyEngineeringMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geotechnical hazards can be a major cause of damage to pipelines, particularly as a result of unacceptable strains induced in buried pipelines due to permanent ground deformations. The common design philosophy in reducing soil restraint involves taking measures to effectively isolate the pipeline from the anticipated surrounding soil movements. One of the important engineering design considerations in this regard is the selection of suitable trench backfill material(s). Full-scale model tests have revealed that, in addition to the internal friction angle, coarseness of the backfill material is also an important parameter in controlling the lateral soil restraints on the pipes due to ground movements. It can be demonstrated that discrete element approach is suitable to study the effect of particle size on lateral soil loads of buried pipelines subjected to ground movement. This paper describes the outcome from DEM numerical modeling of the response of buried pipelines subjected to lateral ground movements, with a comparison of the findings with experimental results.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207