MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019455418 · doi:10.1115/1.1426084

Analytical Modeling of the Contact Stress With Nonlinear Gaskets

2001· article· en· W2019455418 on OpenAlexaff
Abdel‐Hakim Bouzid, M. Derenne

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pressure Vessel Technology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Structural Analysis Methods
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGasketFlangeContact mechanicsStructural engineeringFinite element methodNonlinear systemMaterials scienceStress (linguistics)EngineeringContact analysisJoint (building)Mechanical engineeringForensic engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gasket contact stress and its variation through the gasket width is caused by the rotation of the flange and has an influence on the leakage tightness behavior of bolted flange joints. The future implementation by the ASME of proposed design rules is based on new gasket constants obtained from the ROTT (room temperature tightness) tests conducted on rigid platens. The gasket contact stress distribution needs to be addressed for the purpose of better joint tightness predictions. This paper presents a comprehensive analytical method that predicts the gasket contact stress distribution taking into account the nonlinear mechanical behavior of the gasket material. Based on the flange rotational flexibility, the proposed analytical model that is implemented in the “SuperFlange” program is supported and validated by numerical FEA and experimental analyses on flange rotations, radial distribution of gasket contact stress, and joint leak tightness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations32
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pressure Vessel TechnologySame topicEngineering Structural Analysis MethodsFrench-language works237,207