Effect of Operating Pressure and Dent Depth on Burst Strength of NPS30 Linepipe With Dent–Crack Defect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Buried linepipe can be exposed to various external interferences and corrosive environment and as a result, damage in the form of dent or corrosion or crack or gouge or combination of any of these damages can form in the pipe wall. A defect combining dent and crack, often known as dent–crack defect, which may lead to a rupture or leak in the pipe wall and hence, the pipeline operator becomes concerned about the performance and safety of the pipeline. A research was recently completed at the Centre for Engineering Research in Pipelines (CERP), University of Windsor to study the influence of dent depth and operating line pressure on the pressure capacity (burst strength) of 30 in. diameter and X70 grade linepipe. This study found that the dent depth of 12% with crack depth of 4 mm or more can reduce the pressure capacity by 38%. This paper discusses the test specimens, test setup, test procedure, test results, and data obtained from finite element analyses.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".