Quantification of Uncertainties in Inline Inspection Data for Metal-loss Corrosion on Energy Pipelines and Implications for Reliability Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the major threats to the oil and gas transmission pipeline integrity is metal-loss corrosion. Pipeline operators periodically inspect the size of the metal loss corrosion in a pipeline using in-line inspection (ILI) tools to avoid pipe failure which may lead to severe consequences. To predict pipe failure efficiently, reliability-based corrosion management program is gaining popularity as it effectively incorporates all the uncertainties involved in the pipe failure prediction. The focus of the research reported in this thesis is to investigate the unaddressed issues in the reliability-based corrosion assessment to assist in better predicting pipe failure.\nFirst, a methodology is proposed to facilitate the use of RSTRENG (Remaining Strength of Corroded Pipe) and CSA (Canadian standards association) burst pressure capacity models in reliability-based failure prediction of pipelines. Use of RSTRENG and CSA models require the detail geometric information of a corrosion defect, which may not be available in the ILI reports. To facilitate the use of CSA and RSTRENG models in the reliability analysis, probabilistic characteristics of parameters that relate the detailed defect geometry to its simplified characterizing parameters was derived by using the high-resolution geometric data for a large set of external metal-loss corrosion defects identified on an in-service pipeline in Alberta, Canada.\nNext, a complete framework is proposed to quantify the measurement error associated with the ILI measured corrosion defect length, effective length, and effective depth of oil and gas pipelines. A relatively large set of ILI-reported and field-measured defect data is collected from different in-service pipelines in Canada and used to develop the measurement error models. The proposed measurement error models associated with the ILI reported corrosion defect length, effective length, and effective depth is the weighted average of the measurement errors of the corresponding Type I and Type II defects and the weighted factor is the likelihood of ILI reported corrosion defect being a Type I defect (without cluster error) or a Type II defect (with clustering error). A log-logistic model is proposed to quantify the weighted factor. The application of the proposed measurement error models is demonstrated by evaluating probability of failure of a real corroded pipe joint through system reliability analysis.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".