Study of the Residual Strain in Lap Joints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both experiments and finite element analysis were carried out to study the residual strain (stress) in the riveted lap joint for a better understanding of the fatigue life of fuselage lap joints. A force-controlled riveting process was used to apply a constant load ramp to install the rivets. Strain variations on the joint surface were measured using microstrain gauges during the riveting process. Because neutrons are known to penetrate through many centimeters of aluminum alloys, neutron diffraction was used to provide a nondestructive technique to determine strains at certain depths in the joint. Parallel to the experimental testing, a two-dimensional axisymmetric finite element model was developed to simulate the riveting process. Both material and geometric nonlinearities, as well as nonlinear contact boundary conditions, were used in this numerical model. Comparisons between the numerical simulations and experimental results focused on the rivet driven head deformations and strain variations, and the results showed that the current two-dimensional axisymmetric finite element model using the proper boundary conditions can reliably be used to determine the residual strains (stresses) present in joints that were induced during the riveting process.
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 | 0.000 | 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".