MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stress intensity factors and weight functions for deep semi‐elliptical surface cracks in finite‐thickness plates

2002· article· en· W2015423773 on OpenAlexaff
Xin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueFatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStress intensity factorFinite element methodMaterials scienceStress (linguistics)Surface (topology)GeometryIntensity (physics)Weight functionStress concentrationFinite thicknessSurface stressMathematicsComposite materialMathematical analysisStructural engineeringMechanicsFracture mechanicsOpticsPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Three‐dimensional finite element analyses have been conducted to calculate the stress intensity factors for deep semi‐elliptical cracks in flat plates. The stress intensity factors are presented for the deepest and surface points on semi‐elliptic cracks with a/t ‐values of 0.9 and 0.95 and aspect ratios ( a/c ) from 0.05 to 2. Uniform, linear, parabolic or cubic stress distributions were applied to the crack face. The results for uniform and linear stress distributions were combined with corresponding results for surface cracks with a/t = 0.6 and 0.8 to derive weight functions over the range 0.05 ≤ a/c ≤ 2.0 and 0.6 ≤ a/t ≤ 0.95. The weight functions were then verified against finite element data for parabolic or cubic stress distributions. Excellent agreements are achieved for both the deepest and surface points. The present results complement stress intensity factors and weight functions for surface cracks in finite thickness plate developed previously.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.191 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & StructuresSame topicFatigue and fracture mechanicsFrench-language works237,207