Multi-directional force–displacement response of underground pipe in sand
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A methodology is presented to evaluate multi-directional force–displacement relationships for soil–pipeline interaction analysis and design. Large-scale tests of soil reaction to pipe lateral and uplift movement in dry and partially saturated sand are used to validate plane strain, finite element (FE) soil, and pipe continuum models. The FE models are then used to characterize force versus displacement performance for lateral, vertical upward, vertical downward, and oblique orientations of pipeline movement in soil. Using the force versus displacement relationships, the analytical results for pipeline response to strike-slip fault rupture are shown to compare favorably with the results of large-scale tests in which strike-slip fault movement was imposed on 250 and 400 mm diameter high-density polyethylene pipelines in partially saturated sand. Analytical results normalized with respect to maximum lateral force are provided on 360° plots to predict maximum pipe loads for any movement direction. The resulting methodology and dimensionless plots are applicable for underground pipelines and conduits at any depth, subjected to relative soil movement in any direction in dry or saturated and partially saturated medium to very dense sands.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it