MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999067553 · doi:10.1061/9780784482506.054

Mechanical Performance of a Pressure Pipe CIPP Liner with Stress Concentration Effects Associated with Local Defects

2019· article· en· W2999067553 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaoan He, Shawn Kenny

Bibliographic record

VenuePipelines 2019 · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStress (linguistics)Materials scienceComposite materialStructural engineeringForensic engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, continuum finite element modelling procedures are used to examine the mechanical response and performance of a cured in place pipe (CIPP) liner for pressure pipe. The external cast iron pipe and internal CIPP liner was modelled using three-dimensional brick (C3D8I) elements with multiple elements through thickness depending on the CIPP liner diameter to wall thickness (D/t) ratio. The modelling procedures were calibrated with available public domain data and the anisotropic material behaviour of the CIPP liner was established using tensile coupon tests data. A parameter study was conducted to assess mechanical performance of a pressure pipe CIPP liner with stress concentration effects due to local defects (e. g. wall voids). The sensitivity study investigated the CIPP liner outside diameter to CIPP wall thickness ratio (D/t), host pipe void diameter to host pipe inside diameter ratio (d/D), hoop stress due to internal pressure to yield stress ratio for the CIPP liner (σh/σy), and CIPP liner/host pipe interface friction coefficient (μ). Performance envelopes were developed that were consistent with current engineering practice and illustrated a class of parameters where an engineering condition assessment would be required to evaluate the CIPP liner performance. Material yield behaviour was observed for the higher liner dimension (D/t > 60) and hoop stress to yield ratios (σh/σy ≥ 0.6). The limit state can be governed by axial tension rather than ring tension when void ratios (d/D) are greater than 0.4. As the void ratio (d/D) increases, the hoop stress tends to behave as an unconstrained liner in the radial direction. The fully bonded interface has a distinct effect of reducing the axial, hoop, and effective stress.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePipelines 2019Same topicStructural Integrity and Reliability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207