MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1168699050 · doi:10.1520/stp14720s

On the Standardization of Fretting Fatigue Test Method—Modeling Issues Related to the Thermal Constriction Phenomenon and Prediction of Contact Temperature

2000· book-chapter· en· W1168699050 on OpenAlexaff
MH Attia

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical stress and fatigue analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrettingStandardizationMaterials scienceConstrictionContact theoryTest (biology)Structural engineeringForensic engineeringMechanical engineeringComposite materialEngineeringComputer scienceMedicineGeologyCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The temperature field in the contact zone has a significant effect on the material microstructure, its properties, the oxidation process, and the thermal contact stresses. To standardize fretting fatigue tests, one has to be able to predict and control the contact temperature. Since direct temperature measurement is practically impossible, analytical models are required to estimate the friction-induced temperatures rise under fretting conditions. The main objective of the present work is to model the thermal constriction phenomenon in fretting fatigue and wear processes, considering the roughness and waviness of contacting surfaces. These asperity-scale models can be combined with large scale analyses, e.g. finite element method, to account for the thermal characteristics of the whole tribo-system, its boundary conditions, as well as the spatial variation in the slip amplitude and coefficient of friction over the interface. The debatable question on whether the contact temperature in fretting fatigue is significant is addressed, considering a wide range of materials and applied loads. The analysis showed that the randomness of the contact size may substantially increase the micro-constriction impedance of the fretting interface. The paper is concluded with recommendations for future work to experimentally validate these models, and to examine the effect of the spatial maldistribution of the micro-contacts, and the effect of surface oxide on the contact temperature prediction.

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)0.000
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 score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations4
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMechanical stress and fatigue analysisFrench-language works237,207