IP Library Granted Patent US 12,229,841
Granted Patent B2
US 12,229,841 · App. 16/452,922 · Granted Feb 18, 2025

Cross-bore risk assessment and risk management tool

Inventor: Matthew Scharpf (Louisville, KY)
Assignee: HYDROMAX USA, LLC
G06Q50/06G06N20/00G06Q10/0635G06T11/60G06T2210/56
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,229,841
App. No.
16/452,922
Granted
Feb 18, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

A method for cross-bore risk management involves receiving at least one dataset comprising a plurality of assets and cross-bore data. A risk probability value is calculated, using a processor, based on the cross-bore data for each asset of the plurality of assets using machine learning techniques. The risk probability values are spatially distributed around each respective asset. A graphical output is produced that illustrates the risk probability for a specified geographical area based on the spatially distributed risk probability values.

Claims (29)

1. A method for cross-bore risk management, comprising:

receiving at least one dataset comprising a plurality of assets and cross-bore data;

calculating, using a processor, a risk probability value based on the cross-bore data for each asset of the plurality of assets using machine learning techniques;

spatially distributing the risk probability values around each respective asset; and

producing a graphical output illustrating the risk probability for a specified geographical area based on the spatially distributed risk probability values.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the risk probability value is calculated using orthogonalized quadrature.

3. The method of claim 1 , wherein spatially distributing the risk probability values comprises calculating field values at locations radially away from each respective asset.

4. The method of claim 1 , wherein spatially distributing the risk probability values comprises calculating field values around line segments.

5. The method of claim 4 , wherein calculating field values around line segments comprises distributing probability value perpendicularly along the length of the segment and radially from the end vertices using a field equation.

6. The method of claim 1 , wherein producing the graphical output comprises generating a raster image based on the spatially distributed risk probability values.

7. The method of claim 6 , further comprising producing contour lines of cumulative risk density using the raster image.

8. The method of claim 7 , further comprising generating polygons using the contour lines.

9. The method of claim 8 , further comprising prioritizing work based on the polygons.

10. The method of claim 1 , wherein the graphical output is a heat map.

11. A system for cross-bore risk management, comprising:

a processor; and

a memory storing computer program instructions which when executed by the processor cause the processor to perform operations comprising:

receiving at least one dataset comprising a plurality of assets and cross-bore data;

calculating a risk probability value based on the cross-bore data for each asset of the plurality of assets using machine learning techniques;

spatially distributing the risk probability values around each respective asset; and

producing a graphical output illustrating the risk probability for a specified geographical area based on the spatially distributed risk probability values.

12. The method of claim 11 , wherein the risk probability value is calculated using orthogonalized quadrature.

13. The system of claim 11 , wherein spatially distributing the risk probability values comprises calculating field values at locations radially away from each respective asset.

14. The system of claim 11 , wherein spatially distributing the risk probability values comprises calculating field values around line segments.

15. The system of claim 14 , wherein calculating field values around line segments comprises distributing probability value perpendicularly along the length of the segment and radially from the end vertices using a field equation.

16. The system of claim 11 , wherein producing the graphical output comprises generating a raster image based on the spatially distributed risk probability values.

17. The system of claim 16 , further comprising producing contour lines of cumulative risk density using the raster image.

18. The system of claim 17 , further comprising generating polygons using the contour lines.

19. The system of claim 11 , wherein the graphical output is a heat map.

Assignments (2)
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Dec 30, 2020
From: HYDROMAX USA, LLC
To: TWIN BROOK CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC, AS AGENT
Reel/Frame 054778/0580 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jun 27, 2019
From: SCHARPF, MATTHEW
To: HYDROMAX USA, LLC
Reel/Frame 049609/0094 →
Continuity (3)
Provisional Application 62818456 · Mar 14, 2019
Provisional Application 62690590 · Jun 27, 2018
Related Publication 20200005406A1 · Jan 2, 2020
References Cited (43)
US 8375032B2 · Birdwell et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8583386B2 · Armon et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8988969B2 · Wallbom et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9183524B2 · Close et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9183527B1 · Close · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 9219886B2 · Sooy · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 9534490B2 · Farrag et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 11906989B2 · Lendi · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 20110261649A1 · Wallbom · 2011 [cited by examiner]
US 20150154522A1 · Mircean · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20160103433A1 · Sahni · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20160104071A1 · Brueckner · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20160283915A1 · Aggarwal · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20160356666A1 · Bilal et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20180171774A1 · Ringer et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180349817A1 · Goel et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
CH 720477 · 2024 [cited by applicant]
CN 10135757 · 2009 [cited by applicant]
CN 101354757B · 2010 [cited by examiner]
DE 102023131403 · 2024 [cited by applicant]
WO 2014142929 · 2014 [cited by applicant]
WO 2017171734 · 2017 [cited by applicant]
Dasari et al., “Web-Based Platform for Force Main Infrastructure Asset Management”, retrieved from the internet, https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/bitstream/handle/10919/72246/Dasari_V_T_2016.pdf, Aug. 13, 2016, p. 30. [cited by applicant]
Barrios et al., “Using the Gravity Model to Estimate the Spatial Spread of Vector-Borne Diseases”, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 9, 2012, pp. 4346-4364. [cited by applicant]
Chen, “The Distance-Decay Function of Geographical Gravity Model: Power Law or Exponential Law?”, Chaos, Soliton & Fractals, vol. 77, Aug. 2015, pp. 174-189. [cited by applicant]
Kurowska et al. “The Use of Gravity Model in Spatial Planning”, Environmental Engineering 10th International Conference, Apr. 2017, 9 pages. [cited by applicant]
Mele et al., “A Critique of the Gravitational Model in Estimating the Determinants of Trade Flows”, International Journal of Business and Commerce, vol. 2, No. 1, Sep. 2012, pp. 13-23. [cited by applicant]
Nekola et al., “The Distance Decay of Similarity in Biogeography and Ecology”, Journal of Biogeography, vol. 26, No. 4, Jul. 1999, pp. 867-878. [cited by applicant]
Oliphant et al., “Modeling Cross Bore Risk”, 2017, 5 pages. [cited by applicant]
Taylor, “Distance Decay in Spatial Interactions”, 1975, 19 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tony Sileo (moderator), “Risk Model for Cross-Boring,” Slideplayer.com, 2016 [online] Retrieved on Sep. 9, 2024 from the Internet: <URL: slideplayer.com/slide/13176092/> (17 pages). [cited by applicant]
Shittu Whanda et al., “Modelling of Potential Pipeline Impact Radius and High Consequence Area in a Wetland Sub-Region of Nigeria,” Journal of Geographic Information System, 2015, 7, 692-709 (published online Dec. 2015 … [cited by applicant]
Javier Tejedor et al., “Machine Learning Methods for Pipeline Surveillance Systems Based on Distributed Acoustic Sensing: A Review,” Journal of Applied Sciences 2017, 7, 841 (published online Aug. 16, 2017). Retrieved o… [cited by applicant]
Bahareh Inanloo et al., “A decision aid GIS-based risk assessment and vulnerability analysis approach for transportation and pipeline networks,” Safety Science 84 (2016) 57-66 (published online Apr. 2016). Retrieved on … [cited by applicant]
Adewumi Rowland, “GIS-Based Prediction of Pipeline Third-Party Interference Using Hybrid Multivariate Statistical Analysis,” PhD Thesis, School of Marine Science and Technology, Newcastle University Newcastle Upon Tyne … [cited by applicant]
Lei Ma et al., “Quantitative risk analysis of urban natural gas pipeline networks using geographical information systems,” Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, vol. 26, Issue 6 (published online Nov. 20… [cited by applicant]
Hassan Al-Barqawi, et al., “Condition Rating Model for Underground Infrastructure Sustainable Water Mains,” Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, vol. 20, No. 2, May 2006 (published online May 1, 2006). Retr… [cited by applicant]
Oliphant, K. (May 21, 2015). Modeling Cross Bore Risk [Conference Presentation]. AGA 2015 Operations Conference & Biennial Exhibition, Grapevine, TX, United States. [cited by applicant]
Azari, P., & Karimi, M. (2017). QUANTITATIVE RISK MAPPING OF URBAN GAS PIPELINENETWORKS USING GIS. ISPRS—International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 319-324. [cited by applicant]
D'Atri, M.F., Rodriguez, D., & Garcia-Martinez, R. (2009). IMPROVING PIPELINE RISK MODELS BY USING DATA MINING TECHNIQUES.http:/ /members.igu.org/html/wgc2009/papers/docs/wgcFinal00663.pdf. [cited by applicant]
Third Party Submission (TPSI) into child U.S. Appl. No. 18/163,642, TPS1 filed on Dec. 8, 2023 by Elaine Johnson. [cited by applicant]
Third Party Submission (TPS2) into child U.S. Appl. No. 18/163,662, TPS1 filed on Dec. 8, 2023 by Elaine Johnson. [cited by applicant]
Letter to the Examiner, dated Sep. 11, 2024 having an attachment, which is a Sep. 10, 2024 Letter from Third Party Counsel. [cited by applicant]