Prediction of edge failure of dual phase 780 steel subjected to hole expansion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The edge failure of a dual phase steel, DP780, under hole expansion (stretch flange) deformation conditions is examined. In order to assess the effect of damage processes without the presence of notches due to shearing, machined holes with a smooth edge condition were expanded with a conical punch. Images of the expansion as well as punch load-displacement were recorded during the tests. The GISSMO damage based failure criteria was implemented in a finite element model to predict the load-displacement of the punch and the initial crack formation. This failure criteria was calibrated using the effective plastic failure strain versus triaxiality data obtained from a set of uniaxial and notched tensile samples. The predicted punch load-displacement curve was found to be in agreement with observations including the load drop at the onset of failure. The predicted peak load of 23.4kN compared favorably to the observed peak of 24.4kN. The model predicted a hole expansion ratio of 53.4% and compared well to the experimentally observed ratio of 51.0% ± 10.0%.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".