Compatibility between Concrete Coating, Mainline Coating, and CP System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Concrete coatings are applied on top of anti-corrosion coatings as weight coating. Concrete coatings are used in off-shore pipelines for buoyancy protection and in on-shore pipelines as backfill protection. Backfill protection with concrete is used in rocky locations and at river crossings. Application of concrete coatings on oil and gas pipelines is relatively new, but steel-polymeric coatings-concrete system is extensively used in many structures including bridges and buildings. In those industries, the use of epoxy anti corrosion coating beneath the concrete coating has been much debated. Some regulations in those industries require application of epoxy coating while others prohibit the use of epoxy coating beneath concrete coating, i.e., in the infrastructure industry the use of concrete is mandatory while that of epoxy coating is optional, whereas in the oil and gas industry the use of anti-corrosion coating is mandatory while concrete coating is used in special circumstances. In this paper, long-term cathodic disbondment test was carried out using a pipe sample protected with both epoxy anticorrosion coating and concrete coating. During the investigation the corrosion potential and pH were recorded. After the test the disbonded area of the anticorrosion coating was measured. From the online and postmortem results, the compatibility between concrete coating, mainline coating, and cathodic protection was investigated. There was no cathodic disbondment of anticorrosion coating after 120-day test indicating that the application of outer concrete coating does not physically damage the anticorrosion coating.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".