MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405361163 · doi:10.1115/ipc2024-133623

Advanced Assessment of Pipeline Stress-Relief

2024· article· en· W4405361163 on OpenAlex

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
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMaterial Properties and Failure Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline (software)Stress (linguistics)Stress reliefComputer scienceMaterials scienceOperating systemComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Pipelines traversing landslides can be subjected to forces due to ground displacement. Stress-relief projects are usually planned before strain in the pipe, or a girth weld reaches one of the strain capacities associated with a limit state event using a certain safety margin. Accurate estimation of the pipe strain growth due to the slide movement is a key input for planning stress-relief projects. Through presenting a case study, this paper introduces the concept of an advanced stress-relief assessment approach. This method uses finite element simulation of pipe-soil interaction, to estimate the evolution of strain before stress-relief, pipe rebound as a result of stress-relief, and extension of the asset life after the backfill is completed. Using this modeling, the effects of additional improvements that can be added to a stress-relief project can also be estimated properly. These measures can enhance the performance of the pipe by increasing its strain capacity or reducing the impact of the slide movement. The primary benefit of completing such assessment is to be able to optimize the timing of stress-relief projects. Given that the strain growth rate usually accelerates as more strain accumulates in the pipe, timely stress-relief can prevent excessive plastic deformations and consequently increase the benefit of stress-relief projects. This is especially important for lines, for which pipe replacement is much more expensive than a simple stress-relief (without cutouts). The next step in this assessment is to use the output of this model for different scenarios of stress-relief in a risk assessment. This risk assessment provided an opportunity to compare the stress-relief option with horizontal directional drilling with a completely different cost/performance combination. The result of this assessment showed that if planned and executed as recommended, the stress-relief option can result in risk reduction below the risk target with significantly lower cost and complexity.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

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)0.0100.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.261 · 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