MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995720963 · doi:10.1115/ipc2006-10231

Ductile Fracture Resistance Measurements in High Grade Steels

2006· article· en· W1995720963 on OpenAlexaff
L. N. Pussegoda, Abdelfettah Fredj, Andrea Fonzo, G. Demofonti, Gianluca Mannucci, Brian Rothwell

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 3: Materials and Joining; Pipeline Automation and Measurement; Risk and Reliability, Parts A and B · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal Forming Simulation Techniques
Canadian institutionsTransCanada (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceFracture mechanicsFracture (geology)Displacement (psychology)Crack tip opening displacementComposite materialCrack growth resistance curveFracture toughnessStructural engineeringCrack closureEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent developments in ductile fracture resistance measures in high grade steels in the pipeline industry include the crack tip opening angle (CTOA) and “steady state” fracture propagation energy, using 3-point bend specimens. The CTOA has been found to be a function of specimen ligament size. With the availability of instrumented hammers, it became possible to resolve propagation energy using the load-displacement curve using a single specimen. This paper focuses on refining the steady state fracture propagation energy, using back-slotted Drop Weight Tear Test (DWTT) specimens. The study included numerical simulation of the dynamic response of back-slotted specimens. The significance of the back-slot in altering the stress/strain field ahead of the propagation crack is discussed. The numerical simulation was also used to determine the strain rate in the “process zone” of the crack tip during steady state fracture propagation.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score0.916

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 3: Materials and Joining; Pipeline Automation and Measurement; Risk and Reliability, Parts A and BSame topicMetal Forming Simulation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207