MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3210845840

Application and Evaluation of Non-Destructive Testing Methods for Buried Pipes

2017· dissertation· en· W3210845840 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Dong Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaQueen's University
KeywordsForensic engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceReliability engineeringConstruction engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis investigated and evaluated non-destructive condition assessment methods for both cast iron water pipes and large diameter sewer and culvert systems. A state-of-the-art review of Non-destructive Testing (NDT) technologies available for cast iron water pipes and corrugated steel culverts identified the strengths and weaknesses of each technology. Guidelines were developed for selecting NDT technologies for use in industry. An investigation of NDT techniques to help establish the relationship between ground movement and cast iron water pipe breaks was then undertaken. A total of fifteen segments of 150 mm cast iron water pipes were monitored using an acoustic-based pipe condition assessment technique to estimate the remaining wall thickness and presence of leaks. Three of the fifteen segments were then selected for seasonal ground deformation monitoring using both a Total Station and LiDAR system. Results showed that both technologies could be used to monitor differential ground movement. Ground movements of 20-25 mm were observed for the pavement above a location with a confirmed leak while minimal movement was seen on the street without leaks. Finally, an investigation of NDT techniques for erosion void detection was conducted. A testbed consisting of two buried pipes (a reinforced concrete pipe with 1.2 m internal diameter and a corrugated steel horizontal ellipse culvert with a span of 1.6 m and a height of 1.35 m) was prepared in the West Pit of the Geoengineering Laboratory at Queen’s University, featuring prefabricated erosion voids of known dimensions adjacent to the pipes. Tests were conducted using handheld and conventional Backscatter Computed Tomography (BCT), Pipe Penetrating Radar (PPR), Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR), and Infrared Thermography (IRT) to evaluate the detection and characterization accuracy of these technologies. Results showed that both the BCT technologies detected all three voids behind the corrugated steel pipe wall, while PPR and GPR found one of the three voids next to the reinforced concrete pipe. Results also showed that cooling down thermography was success in detecting three voids behind the corrugated steel pipe wall and their approximate locations as well as the longitudinal and circumferential dimensions of void contact with the pipe.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207