MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405362434 · doi:10.1115/ipc2024-132910

Evaluation of Fracture Toughness of Welded Line Pipe Steels for Hydrogen Gas Transportation Based on ASME B31.12 and Alternative Test Method Development

2024· article· en· W4405362434 on OpenAlexaff
Eun Jung Seo, Amrita Bag, Michael Gaudet, Shaojie Chen, Greg Lehnhoff, Muhammad Rashid, Muhammad Arafin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Failure Analysis and Simulation
Canadian institutionsEVRAZ (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeldingFracture toughnessMaterials scienceMetallurgyLine (geometry)ToughnessHydrogenFracture (geology)EngineeringStructural engineeringComposite materialChemistryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A high-strength line pipe steel grade, namely API X65, has been developed and qualified for its use under pressurized hydrogen gas following the ASME B31.12 code. The bolt-load compact specimens taken from the base metal, heat-affected zone, and weld seam of the electric resistance welded (ERW) pipes were tested using a constant displacement method in 100% hydrogen at pressure up to 13.8 MPa (2000 psi) for 1000 hours. All fracture toughness testing was conducted at RINA Consulting – Centro Sviluppo Materiali SpA and EWI Hydrogen Environment Testing Lab, using approximately 50 specimens from different heats produced at Evraz North America (ENA). At the fracture surface of the tested specimens, no significant crack extension was observed; the crack extension beyond the fatigue pre-crack was smaller than 0.25 mm after preloading and hydrogen exposure. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) fractographs revealed a dimpled fracture surface in front of the fatigue pre-crack, i.e. no hydrogen-associated brittle fracture feature was noted. Based on these results, the minimum value of the threshold stress intensity factor, KIH, was calculated to be 70–80 MPa√m for all the specimens, i.e., fulfilling the qualification criteria (KIH > 55 MPa√m) described in the code ASME B31.12 Option B. The lessons learned during the qualification testing, ongoing efforts to develop alternative testing methods, including elastic-plastic fracture testing (i.e., ASTM E1820) and implications for the future will be discussed.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMechanical Failure Analysis and SimulationFrench-language works237,207