MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312659718 · doi:10.1115/ipc2022-87168

A Transparent ASME B31.8-Based Strain Assessment Method Using 3D Measurement of Dent Morphology

2022· article· en· W4312659718 on OpenAlexaff
Shenwei Zhang, Billy Zhang, Rick Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Destructive Testing Techniques
Canadian institutionsAlberta Energy
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalipersCurvatureVisualizationSpline (mechanical)BendingComputer scienceEngineering drawingStructural engineeringEngineeringMathematicsMechanical engineeringArtificial intelligenceGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents a comprehensive methodology to evaluate the geometric strain of pipeline in a dented area caused by mechanical damage. This methodology was formulated based on the approach recommended by ASME B31.8 and built the transparency of the entire process of dent strain assessment using three-dimensional (3D) measurement of dent morphology reported by the Caliper tools from in-line inspection (i.e., Caliper data). The 2D Fourier Transform in conjunction with band rejection filtering method was used to filter the signal noise and smooth the 3D morphology of dent. The cubic spline was utilized to characterize the discrete 2D longitudinal and circumferential profiles for curvature and arch length calculations, which were used to evaluate the bending strain and membrane strain, respectively. The effective strain was then calculated using the method recommended by ASME B31.8. To demonstrate the application of the methodology, a tool with user-friendly interface and powerful visualization and reporting functions was developed using the methodologies reported in this paper. The reported methodology enables development of dent strain assessment tool and benefit pipeline operators to facilitate dent integrity management program.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.240 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNon-Destructive Testing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207