MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095055488 · doi:10.1115/omae2006-92503

Qualification of Welding Procedures for ExxonMobil High Strain Pipelines

2006· article· en· W2095055488 on OpenAlexaff
Martin W. Hukle, Douglas S. Hoyt, James B. LeBleu, John P. Dwyer, Agnes Marie Horn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical stress and fatigue analysis
Canadian institutionsImperial Oil (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeldingSubmarine pipelinePipeline transportSettlement (finance)EngineeringStructural engineeringPipingFrost heavingDisplacement (psychology)Pipeline (software)Geotechnical engineeringMarine engineeringMechanical engineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Weld procedure qualification methodologies for ExxonMobil high strain pipelines are presented. ExxonMobil has been involved in the design and construction of high strain pipelines for both onshore and offshore applications. These projects have included onshore applications involving potential seismic activity (fault displacement and soil liquefaction) as well as arctic applications that may involve displacements associated with frost heave and thaw settlement. Recent offshore installations have been designed and constructed to accommodate potential displacement caused by ice scour. Some of these installations have been designed to accommodate in excess of 3% longitudinal tensile strain demand. A critical element of the overall pipeline design is the qualification and validation of acceptable strain capacity for the pipeline girth welds. A girth weld qualification test program, based on large scale proof testing (i.e., curved wide plates) has been developed and executed.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.234
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMechanical stress and fatigue analysisFrench-language works237,207