Simulation of Ductile Crack Propagation in Pipeline Steels Using Cohesive Zone Modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents recent results of numerical studies on stable crack extension of high toughness steels typical of those in modern gas pipelines using cohesive zone modeling. Two sets of materials are modeled. The first material set models a typical structural steel, with variable toughness described by four traction-separation (TS) laws. The second set models an X70 pipe steel, with three different TS laws. For each TS law, there are three defining parameters: the maximum cohesive strength, the final separation and the work of separation. The specimens analyzed include a crack in an infinite plate (small-scale yielding, SSY) and a standard drop-weight tear test (DWTT). Fracture propagation characteristics and values of crack-tip opening angle (CTOA) are obtained from these two types of specimens. It is shown that cohesive zone models can be successfully used to simulate ductile crack propagation and to numerically measure CTOAs. The ductile crack propagation characteristics and CTOAs obtained from SSY and DWTT specimens are compared for each set of steels. In addition, the CTOA results from numerical cohesive zone modeling of DWTT specimens of X70 steel are compared with those from laboratory tests.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".