MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900019230 · doi:10.1115/ipc2018-78717

Liquid Pipeline Location Specific Cyclic Pressure Determination

2018· article· en· W2900019230 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vlado Semiga, Aaron Dinovitzer, Sanjay Tiku, Geoff Vignal

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSCADAPipeline (software)Pipeline transportPressure measurementPressure sensorMarine engineeringEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceEngineeringMechanical engineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the majority of liquid pipelines, the pump station discharge pressure ranges are much greater than the pressure ranges experienced at the suction end of the downstream pump station. Consequently, the cyclic pressure induced fatigue damage accumulation rate is greater at the discharge end than at the suction end of a given pipeline segment. In completing an integrity assessment of a fatigue susceptible feature, assuming that the pump station discharge cyclic pressure profile applies to all features in the line segment is conservative. This conservative assumption can lead to un-necessary repairs, unintentional damage from over-prescribed maintenance, or inefficient decisions regarding maintenance action prioritization. The following paper presents the results of a Canadian Energy Pipeline Association (CEPA) initiative to develop a simple approach to define the cyclic pressure history at any point in a liquid pipeline segment based on the bounding discharge and suction pump station Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) pressure time history data. The approach was developed based on collected operating pipeline SCADA pressure time history data for line segments with intermediate measurement points which could be used to validate the developed model. The pressure time histories for all the locations were analyzed using a Rainflow cycle counting technique to develop pressure range spectra (i.e. histograms of pressure range events) and the cyclic pressure severity of each of the time histories was characterized by the Spectrum Severity Indicator (SSI). The SSI represents the number of annual 90MPa hoop stress cycles required to accumulate the same fatigue damage as the actual pressure spectrums. The technique presented in this paper illustrates how to infer the pressure range spectra or SSI at intermediate locations. The technique is shown to be a significant improvement (i.e. higher location specific accuracy) than either applying the discharge pressure spectrum or applying a linear interpolation between discharge and suction conditions in fatigue life assessments. The liquid pipeline cyclic pressure characterization technique presented in this paper will permit integrity assessment or severity ranking of features along a pipeline to be based on an accurate local pressure profile rather than an upper bound. This understanding will help to improve the accuracy of defect loading, one of the three main pillars in integrity assessment (i.e., loading, geometry, materials) for defects susceptible to cyclic loading (e.g., cracking, mechanical damage).

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207