MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985743643 · doi:10.1115/pvp2012-78567

Non-Cyclic Methods for Shakedown Analysis of Cracked Structures

2012· article· en· W1985743643 on OpenAlexaff
Dan Vlaicu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHigh Temperature Alloys and Creep
Canadian institutionsOntario Power Generation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShakedownSingularityLimit loadStructural engineeringStress intensity factorLimit analysisUpper and lower boundsStress (linguistics)Fracture (geology)Finite element methodMathematicsMaterials scienceMathematical analysisEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fatigue calculation of nuclear components under cyclic loading in the inelastic domain is a complex task involving nonlinear material models capable of predicting the strain-stress relationship beyond the yield limit. In this context, the ratcheting boundary that is the cyclic plastic strain accumulation under primary and secondary cyclic loads is a key criterion for structural design. A cyclically loaded structure made of elastic-plastic material is considered elastic shakedown if plastic straining occurs in the first few cycles and the sequent response is wholly elastic. In this paper the finite element calculations of a straight pipe with a notch is used to develop upper and lower bounds limits for the elastic shakedown of structures under periodic loading conditions. Linear methods using elastic compensation approach and the residual stress method derived from Melan’s theorem are used to generate the lower bound limit for the shakedown load while the upper bound is found through a method derived from Koiter’s theorem. Furthermore, the global classical theorems are complemented by local shakedown calculations within the regions near the cracks in terms of stress intensity factors that are evaluated from fracture mechanics theory. The presence of the stress singularity in a cracked structure is breaking down the classical shakedown theory and the conventional shakedown limit for a cracked structure should be zero due to the singularity within the stress field. In this methodology it is considered that the plastic deformation is confined to a relatively limited region around the root of a stationary crack and the energy released rate is associated with the change in the elastic stress field outside of the plastic flow region. Furthermore, probabilistic methods are employed for presenting the response surface plots of the shakedown limit in terms of the maximum accumulated strain and fatigue life against the strain hardening and yield limit.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHigh Temperature Alloys and CreepFrench-language works237,207