MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983147122 · doi:10.2514/1.23684

Riveting Process Induced Residual Stresses Around Solid Rivets in Mechanical Joints

2007· article· en· W1983147122 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aircraft · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRivetResidual stressStructural engineeringFinite element methodEngineeringStress fieldResidualMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringComposite materialComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The interference fit provided by solid rivets introduces a residual stress field beneficial to the fatigue life of riveted joints. Evolution in riveting technology has led to force-controlled riveters which provide greater consistency over the rivet installation process and the resulting residual stress field. By reexamining the rivet installation process and its effects on the formation of residual stresses, the fatigue benefits of rivets could be further exploited. Using a 3-D finite element model, installation of universal and countersunk rivets in monolithic aluminum sheet has been studied. Aspects of accepted riveting practice, including the degree of rivet flushness and the rivet squeeze force were found to play significant roles in the formation of residual stresses. Residual stresses beneath the rivet head were also found to be influenced primarily by through-thickness compression of the joined sheets during riveting, challenging the traditional analogy of riveting to radial expansion processes.

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.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.265 · 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