MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103307654 · doi:10.1139/t07-037

Large-scale modelling of soil–pipe interaction during large amplitude cyclic movements of partially embedded pipelines

2007· article· en· W2103307654 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBermGeotechnical engineeringPipeline transportSubmarine pipelineDisplacement (psychology)GeologySeabedLateral movementEngineeringStructural engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the development of offshore hydrocarbons moves into deeper water, pipelines form an increasingly significant part of the required infrastructure. High-temperature high-pressure pipelines must be designed to accommodate thermal expansion and potential lateral buckling. A novel design approach is to control the formation of pre-engineered lateral buckles to relieve the expansion. The amplitude of these buckles is typically several pipe diameters. Assessment of the force–displacement interaction between the on-bottom pipeline and the seabed is crucial for design. A series of large-scale plane strain model tests has been conducted to measure the response of a pipe segment partially embedded in soft clay, during large amplitude cyclic movements, mimicking consecutive thermal expansion and contraction at a bend in a pipeline. Four key stages in the force–displacement response have been identified: (i) breakout, (ii) suction release, (iii) resistance against a steadily growing active berm, and (iv) additional resistance during collection of a pre-existing dormant berm. A simple upper bound solution is proposed to model the observed response. This solution captures the experimental trends including growth of the active berm and collection of dormant berms. This approach is the first attempt to quantitatively model the mechanisms underlying the response during large-displacement lateral sweeps of an on-bottom pipeline, accounting for the growth of soil berms.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.561
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.213 · 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