MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110504037 · doi:10.1061/9780784479360.100

Looking Past the Pipe Wall: Quantifying Pipe Corrosion and Deterioration with Pipe Penetrating Radar

2015· article· en· W2110504037 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePipelines 2015 · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsDawson College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRebarWater pipePipeGround-penetrating radarTrenchless technologyCorrosionCanalisationMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringStructural engineeringPipingForensic engineeringGeologyPipeline transportComposite materialEngineeringRadarMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pipe Penetrating Radar (PPR) is the underground in-pipe application of GPR, a non-destructive testing method that can detect defects and cavities within and outside mainline diameter (>18 in / 450mm) non-metallic (reinforced concrete, vitrified clay, PVC, HDPE, etc.) pipes. The key advantage of PPR is the unique ability to map pipe wall thickness and deterioration including voids outside the pipe, enabling accurate predictability of needed rehabilitation or the timing of replacement. This paper presents recent advancement of PPR inspection technology together with selected case studies. Two case studies are discussed in detail. The Del Norte Trunk Sewer in Stockton, CA is a 36” reinforced concrete pipe with a 0.7” thick fiberglass liner. The objective of the PPR survey was to determine the condition of the approximately 55 years old lined RC pipe by mapping its wall thickness, rebar cover and detecting voids and/or other anomalies within or outside the pipe wall. The pipe experienced failures in the past and the fiberglass liner has at places also separated from the original RC pipe wall. PPR results confirmed 3.9 to 4.5 inch remaining wall thickness including the grouted fibreglass liner with little variation over the inspected length. Rebar cover appeared to be sufficient with no void type anomalies on any of the inspected lines. A 120 inch diameter brick lined combined sewer pipe was inspected with PPR. The pipe was built in 1906 and experienced wet weather overflows. In order to design the most appropriate rehabilitation strategy the knowledge of voids outside the sewer was critical. Over 6,000 ft of high resolution line data were collected via manned entry. PPR data revealed voids both outside and within the pipe wall and thus provided engineers the information needed to take the appropriate approach to rehabilitate the pipe. With limited available funding and budget constraints becoming more prevalent, timing of rehabilitation and overall intelligent asset management is more critical than ever. PPR provides engineers and utility owners the information to accurately estimate the remaining life left in a pipeline, refine timing of repairs, and ultimately better allocate funding for asset management.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score0.553

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.246 · 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