MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2563343770 · doi:10.1115/ipc2016-64604

Effect of Block Valve and Crack Arrestor Spacing on Thermal Radiation Hazards Associated With Ignited Rupture Incidents for Natural Gas Pipelines

2016· article· en· W2563343770 on OpenAlexaff
Brian Rothwell, Thomas Dessein, Andy Collard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsTransCanada (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental sciencePipeline transportThermalTransient (computer programming)Marine engineeringNuclear engineeringEngineeringPetroleum engineeringMeteorologyComputer sciencePhysicsEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A study was undertaken to evaluate crack arrestor and mainline block valve (MLBV) spacing distances beyond the limits defined in the 49 CFR Part 192 for Class 1 locations for the design of a 42-inch (1,067-mm) OD arctic pipeline. The study assessed whether an MLBV spacing longer than that required by 49 CFR Part 192 for Class 1 locations can provide a level of safety equivalent to that afforded by the spacing recommended in the code. This was accomplished by comparing the hazards in terms of the volume of natural gas released over time, the potential for damage to surrounding structures, and the life safety risk to personnel and the public. The analysis was performed using the software tool PIPESAFE (version 2.20.0), which was developed for a group of pipeline operators by Advantica Technology (now DNV-GL). A full transient analysis of the flow inside the pipeline and through the rupture opening was carried out with automatic shut-off valve (ASV) closures simulated as boundary condition changes at the locations of the valves triggered by the local transient pressure. Gas outflow rates were fed to a structured flame model that calculates the temperature distribution within the flame and the radiant energy emitted and uses the latter to determine the incident thermal radiation field in the area surrounding the rupture, the associated hazard areas and the accumulated thermal radiation dosage over time. These results were compiled into contour plots of thermal radiation intensity for different times; plots of the total area within specific contours of thermal radiation intensity for different times; and plots of the total area within specific contours of accumulated dosage. The dosage-area curves facilitate a direct comparison of the various MLBV and crack arrestor spacing options considered within this study by providing a simple means to establish if the change in spacing causes a substantial change to the affected areas for dosages up to the limits associated with specific levels of lethality to humans and for piloted ignition of wooden structures. It was found that valve spacing has a strong effect on the time at which closure begins to affect the outflow rate. The decline in flow rate after valve closure had significant influence on the thermal radiation field, but these effects only occurred at a relatively late stage. Increasing fracture length led to considerable changes in the shape of the thermal radiation field, but the total footprint within which casualties might be expected in the event of an ignited rupture release and the severity of injuries within the footprint are unaffected by valve closure under the assumed conditions. Similarly, the damage potential to surrounding buildings was unaffected by valve spacing, indicating that increased valve spacing could be implemented in remote, low population density areas without affecting safety.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207