Response of Buried Pipelines Subjected to Abrupt Block Ground Movements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Integrity of the natural gas distribution pipelines, particularly in regions affected by geohazards, is a serious concern for the energy infrastructure worldwide. Pipeline failures due to permanent ground deformations (PGD) caused by seismic activity, landslides, and soil subsidence underscore the need for a deeper understanding of these vulnerabilities. Reported by several researchers, various PGD-related factors affect buried pipelines, including the extent and pattern of ground deformation, the direction of the PGD relative to the pipeline axis, and the width and length of the PGD zone. Most studies evaluate pipeline responses to PGD in either transverse (perpendicular) or longitudinal (parallel) directions relative to the pipeline axis. However, pipelines in the field often intersect with moving ground at angles other than 0° and 90°. This study investigates the behavior of small-diameter steel pipes, used in gas distribution networks, in sandy soils under combined loading scenarios in different directions due to abrupt, block-type PGD. Winkler-based finite-element (FE) models were developed to simulate the pipe responses due to the PGD events. Results indicate that as the PGD angle shifts from lateral to axial, the relative pipeline displacement increases, and, consequently, the mobilization of soil springs also increases. Pipeline bending strains are highest at the PGD boundaries for lateral ground movements and decrease as the PGD angle shifts toward axial, whereas axial strains are uniformly distributed within the deformation zone.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".