Centrifuge modeling of buried continuous pipelines subjected to reverse faulting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seismic ground faulting is a severe hazard for continuous buried pipelines. Over the years, researchers have attempted to understand pipeline behavior mostly via numerical models such as the finite element method. The lack of well-documented field case histories of pipeline failure due to faulting along with the costly and complex facilities needed for full-scale experimental simulation make a centrifuge-based method to determine the behavior of pipelines subject to faulting the best method to verify numerical approaches. This paper presents results from four centrifuge tests investigating the behavior of continuous buried steel pipelines that were subjected to reverse faulting. The axial and bending strains induced in a pipeline are presented. Also investigated is the influence of factors such as faulting offset, burial depth, and pipe diameter on the axial and bending strain of pipelines and on the ground soil failure and pipeline deformation pattern. Finally, the initial strain at the wrinkling point of the pipe under reverse faulting is studied and compared with theoretical values. It was found that the pipe deformation mechanism and damage type are significantly altered by variations in pipe diameter, burial depth, and pipe section slenderness ratio (diameter to thickness ratio). Increasing the diameter and burial depth of a pipe changes the deformation mechanism from beam buckling to wrinkling. The wrinkling strains from these tests are in good agreement with the findings of Hall and Newmark.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".