Can Tarpaulin (Tarp) Covering Protect Pipeline Coating FBE System 1a from UV Degradation?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A field study was carried out to investigate if the use of tarpaulin (Tarp) to cover FBE System 1A coated pipelines can protect the coating from ultraviolet (UV) degradation. Actual outside weathering exposure tests for 24-months were conducted on FBE System 1A coated samples with and without Tarp covering. Changes in the coating Flexibility, Photo-oxidative Index (POI) and Carbonyl Index (CI) were examined at different time intervals during the exposure period. The pipeline coating with a Tarp protector showed no reduction in flexibility and only small changes in POI and CI, which indicated that the Tarp successfully protected the pipeline coating from physical and chemical degradation. The pipeline coating without a Tarp protector showed a noticeable decrease in flexibility and increase in POI and CI of the FBE System 1A coating after continued outdoor exposure. Comparison of these results to previously published work on FBE coated samples that were “protected” by UV light blocking topcoats showed that even though the topcoats were successful in stopping UV induced photo-oxidation, the flexibility of the coating system decreased over time. The previous results indicate that the reduction in flexibility of the FBE coating system may be due to factors other than the photo-oxidative damage of the topmost portion of the coating system. Limited DSC studies showed evidence of molecular coordination (long term relaxation) leading to new, less flexible physical structures of the unprotected samples. The DSC results suggest that the flexibility reduction may be attributed to the cumulative effects of photo-oxidation and physical ageing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".