Out-of-Roundness in NPS30 X70 Pipes Subjected to Concentrated Lateral Load
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pipeline is the common mode for transporting oil, gas, and various petroleum products. Structural integrity of oil and gas transmission pipelines is often threatened by external interferences such as concentrated load, impact load, and external pressure. These external interferences can cause ‘mechanical damage’ leading to structural failure in onshore and offshore linepipes. Lateral load is applied as a concentrated load on a small area of pipe segment and can cause local buckling, bend, dent, or out-of-roundness in the pipe. As an example, a concentrated load in buried onshore linepipe can occur if a segment of the linepipe rests on a narrow rock tip or even a narrow hard surface. Such concentrated lateral load may or may not cause immediate rupture or leak in the linepipe; however, it may produce out-of-roundness with or without a dent in the pipe cross section, which can be detrimental to the structural and/or operational integrity of the pipeline. Hence, the pipeline operator becomes concerned about the performance and safety of the linepipe if a pipe section is subject to a sustained concentrated load. A research work using full-scale tests and finite element method (FEM) was undertaken at the Centre for Engineering Research in Pipelines (CERP), University of Windsor to study the influence of various internal pressures and diameter-to-thickness ratios on the out-of-roundness of 30 in diameter (NPS 30) and X70 grade pipes with D/t of 90 when subjected to a stroke-controlled concentrated load. This paper discusses the test specimens, test setup, test procedure, test results, and FEM results obtained from this study.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".