MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312285115 · doi:10.1115/ipc2022-87098

An Automatic Dent Assessment Tool Using Finite Element Method

2022· article· en· W4312285115 on OpenAlex
Ji Bao, Shenwei Zhang, Billy Zhang, Rick Wang, Ken Zhang

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsAlberta Energy
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite element methodPipeline (software)Computer scienceProcess (computing)von Mises yield criterionStructural engineeringDeformation (meteorology)Mechanical engineeringEngineering drawingEngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Dents are permanent plastic deformations of the pipeline that occur during pipeline construction and operations. Stress and strain concentration at dents may initiate cracks, which pose a threat to the integrity of the pipeline. Since formation of dents involves plastic deformation, a traditional depth-based assessment method cannot accurately capture the strain concentration, e.g. a sharp dent. Dent assessment methods have shifted to strain-based approach in recent years. Engineering Critical Assessment (ECA) procedures are evolving with the development of new methods to calculate the strains associated with a dent. It has been well established that three-dimensional (3D) elastic-plastic Finite Element Analysis (FEA) is the most accurate in the denting process simulation and dent strain calculation. However, FEA modelling of dents interacting with other threats can be extremely laborious and requires high level of FEA expertise. Moreover, continuum FEA is usually computationally expensive and imposes onerous demands for analysis efforts. This paper describes the process that was used to develop an automatic dent assessment tool via FEA. The tool is capable of simulating the denting process of a plain dent and a dent interacting with other threats (e.g., metal loss or gouge). The dent geometry and curvature in FEA are shown to agree well with captured In-line Inspection (ILI) caliper data. The tool also supports batch processing of numerous dents with a highly intelligent post-processing engine that automatically calculates von Mises equivalent strain, ductile failure damage indicator (DFDI) and strain limit damage (SLD) and outputs the results with visual contour plots. The Rainflow pressure cycling counting algorithm and Miner’s rule are incorporated in the tool to predict the fatigue life of the dent utilizing historical pressure data. Case studies are provided to demonstrate the effectiveness of the tool. The development of the tool greatly facilitates the ECA of dents allowing for accurate and efficient management of dents impacting TC Energy’s pipeline system.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.375
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0050.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.305 · 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