Stress in Triple-Row Riveted Lap Joints Under the Influence of Specific Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effects of fastener clearance fit, friction coefficient, and corrosion pillowing on the stress state in triple-row riveted lap joints were studied numerically using three-dimensional finite element methods. The material elastoplastic constitutive relationship and geometric nonlinear properties, as well as nonlinear contact boundary conditions, were included in the numerical simulations. The numerical modeling was validated using experimental measurements of the rivet driven-head deformation and in situ strains. The lap joints were loaded in tension after riveting. Three different clearance fits, three different friction coefficients, and four corrosion-pillowing conditions were analyzed. The stress variations along prescribed paths and full-field contours of the maximum principal stress on joint faying surfaces during the tensile loading stage were investigated. Insightful results of the stress state in riveted lap joints were obtained, which could effectively explain the phenomena observed from joint fatigue tests. The phenomena include 1) the potential major factor to cause the joint fatigue-life scatter, 2) crack-nucleation site location in the top rivet-hole vicinity on the outer-sheet faying surface for the noncorroded joints, and 3) the occurrence of the multiplesite damages in aged and corroded lap joints.
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".