MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900355731 · doi:10.1115/ipc2018-78600

Simulating In-Service Welding of Hot-Tap Branches to Quantify the Effect of Geometry on Level of Restraint

2018· article· en· W2900355731 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Dyck, Stuart Guest, Alireza Kohandehghan, Sean Lepine

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 3: Operations, Monitoring, and Maintenance; Materials and Joining · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicHydrogen embrittlement and corrosion behaviors in metals
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeldingFinite element methodStructural engineeringFillet (mechanics)Pipeline transportFillet weldEngineeringMechanical engineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Economic and environmental incentives encourage operators to maintain pipeline operation during repair and maintenance procedures including hot-tap branch fitting installation onto pipelines. Welding onto a liquid-filled pipeline induces accelerated cooling of the weld and heat affected zone (HAZ), increasing the propensity for cracking. In-service welding codes and due diligence requires that several key factors be considered during the design of an in-service welding procedure specification for its intended purpose. The level of restraint (LoR) imposed by the geometry, material, or dimensional differences of the branch compared to the run pipe has also been shown to be a significant contributor to cracking. Finite element analysis (FEA) was utilized to investigate the geometric effects of an in-service weld procedure to approximate the LoR of hot-tap branch installation. The LoR was quantified and compared by simulating multi-pass weld sequences on two configurations: a branch-on-pipe (BoP) configuration of various dimensions and a configuration using perpendicular plates (PP) that has been used as an alternative to the branch-on-pipe configuration. The highest LoR, as measured by transverse tensile stress at the fillet weld toe, was the branch-on-pipe configuration with the largest branch wall thickness, the smallest branch diameter, the largest run pipe diameter, and the largest run pipe wall thickness. FEA modeling revealed that the PP configuration has lower LoR, thus it is not recommended to use for simulating in-service branch weld procedures.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 3: Operations, Monitoring, and Maintenance; Materials and JoiningSame topicHydrogen embrittlement and corrosion behaviors in metalsFrench-language works237,207