MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313338991 · doi:10.1115/ipc2010-31512

Remaining Local Buckling Resistance of Corroded Pipelines

2010· article· en· W2313338991 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

Venue2010 8th International Pipeline Conference, Volume 1 · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsTransCanada (Canada)University of AlbertaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBucklingStructural engineeringFinite element methodCorrosionPipeline transportParametric statisticsWork (physics)Materials sciencePipeline (software)Computer scienceEngineeringMechanical engineeringComposite materialMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a multi-year PRCI research program that investigated the local buckling (or wrinkling) of onshore pipelines with metal-loss corrosion. The dependence of local buckling resistance on wall thickness suggests that metal-loss defects will considerably reduce such resistance. Due to the lack of experimental data, overly conservative assumptions such as a uniform wall thickness reduction over the entire pipe circumference based on the defect depth have been used in practice. The objective of this research work was to develop local buckling criteria for pipelines with corrosion defects. The work related to local buckling was carried out in three phases by C-FER and the University of Alberta. The first phase included a comprehensive finite element analysis to evaluate the influence of various corrosion defect features and to rank key parameters. Based on the outcome of Phase 1 work, a test matrix was developed and ten full-scale tests were carried out in Phase 2 to collect data for model verification. In Phase 3, over 150 parametric cases were analyzed using finite element models to develop assessment criteria for maximum moment and compressive strain limit. Each criterion includes a set of partial safety factors that were calibrated to meet target reliabilities selected based on recent research related to pipeline code development. The proposed criteria were applied to in-service pipeline examples with general corrosion features to estimate the remaining load-carrying capacity and to assess the conservatism of current practice.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.222 · 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