Evaluation of Anticorrosion Coatings for High Temperature Service
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The continued development of the oil sands in northern Alberta Canada has led to increased use of thermal recovery methods such as Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAG-D) for extraction of the bitumen from deep reserves. The transportation of this heated bitumen to the processing facilities generally requires the use of insulated pipes capable of withstanding internal service temperatures as high as 150°C. Based on existing Canadian regulations, it has been necessary to use anticorrosion coatings under the thermal insulation on buried pipelines intended for petrochemical service. Traditionally, anticorrosion coatings such as cold applied tapes, 2 or 3 layer polyethylene systems, and also epoxy coatings have been available for insulated pipelines operating at temperatures of up to 110°C. The introduction of new heat resistant insulating foams capable of withstanding much higher operating temperatures of at least 150°C has led to the need to also identify compatible anticorrosion coatings. One such material that has been successfully qualified for use with high temperature insulation systems is an epoxy-based coating. In order to evaluate this coating, a variety of methods were used which included; elevated temperature cathodic disbondment testing, thermal gravimetric analysis (TGA), dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA), accelerated heat ageing, and also standard coatings tests specified by the Canadian standard CSA Z245.20. The results of this investigation support the recommendation that the selected coating can withstand operating temperatures of at least 150°C for the expected 30-year life in a typical insulated pipeline.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".