MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Experimental Study of Structural Response of Lined-Corrugated HDPE Pipe Subjected to Normal Fault

2019· article· en· W2979909957 on OpenAlexaff
Min Zhou, Ian D. Moore, Haitao Lan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of CanadaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigh-density polyethyleneGeotechnical engineeringGeologyStrain gaugeMaterials scienceFault (geology)Displacement (psychology)Transverse planeBendingStructural engineeringComposite materialPolyethyleneEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Buried lined-corrugated high density polyethylene (HDPE) pipes have been applied to transport sewage for decades. During its service life, a pipe of this kind could suffer from differential ground motion as a result of various geohazards (e.g., differential settlement induced by tunneling, basement excavations, changes in water table). However, studies of this kind of behavior of thermoplastic sewers have largely been absent in the pipe research literature. A full-scale test was conducted to investigate the structural response of 600-mm diameter lined-corrugated HDPE pipe subjected to differential ground movements associated with a normal fault having dip angle of 90°. This normal fault was simulated in a facility called the Split Box, where half of the floor of the test pit rests on screw jacks that allow it to be lowered in a stepwise process. Strain gauges and optical fibers were used to measure strains in the longitudinal and circumferential directions on the inner or outer surfaces of the pipe. Vertical displacement and cross-section distortion of the pipe were monitored using digital images analyzed using particle image velocimetry (PIV). Test results show that pipe strains were distributed nonlinearly around the pipe cross sections, especially for those measured proximal to the fault. Maximum pipe diameter changes were also observed at pipe cross sections close to the fault. The test results were compared with two current calculation approaches (i.e., the three-beam method and the Kappa method) and it is found that these two methods both overestimated peak bending strains in the pipe relative to those observed in the test.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.393
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.186 · 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.

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

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental EngineeringSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207