MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093017586 · doi:10.1115/ipc2004-0328

Construction and Installation of X100 Pipelines

2004· article· en· W2093017586 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alan Glover, David Horsley, David V. Dorling, Jun-Ichiro Takehara

Bibliographic record

Venue2004 International Pipeline Conference, Volumes 1, 2, and 3 · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOffshore Engineering and Technologies
Canadian institutionsTransCanada (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline transportPipeline (software)Work (physics)WeldingEnvironmental scienceEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The developments of gas fields are increasingly occurring in more remote locations and further from the prime gas demands. Pipeline activity continues to focus on arctic regions of both Canada and the United States. Cost effective solutions to these challenges can be found through innovative technology and the use of higher pressure and higher strength pipelines. TransCanada and its partners have been involved in a series of technology programs on high strength steels, particularly X100, that are focussed on its application for high pressure long distance pipelines. In order to evaluate this technology two field installations of X100 have been performed on the TransCanada system within Alberta. These installations have evaluated the summer and winter construction aspects of X100 pipelines. This paper will describe the work performed to enable the two projects to occur, and the results of the installation. The summer project occurred on the Westpath loop, and consisted of 1 km of NPS 48 by 14.3 mm X100 and was installed in September 2002. The winter project was on the Godin Lake Loop and consisted of 2 km of NPS 36 by 13.2 mm X100 and will be installed in February 2004. The paper will describe the approach taken to the pipe development and the properties required, the requirements for a strain-based design, the fracture control plan, and the welding requirements. Discussion will cover the installations and construction and the conclusions in terms of future projects. The role of code and regulatory bodies in the successful implementation will be covered.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations9
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2004 International Pipeline Conference, Volumes 1, 2, and 3Same topicOffshore Engineering and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207