MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023473648 · doi:10.1115/omae2010-20903

Effect of Constraint on Fatigue Crack Propagation in Notched Plates

2010· article· en· W2023473648 on OpenAlexaff
Xin Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFracture mechanicsConstraint (computer-aided design)Materials scienceCrack closureCrack growth resistance curveStructural engineeringStress concentrationTearingStress intensity factorMechanicsComposite materialEngineeringPhysicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been observed that the loss of crack tip constraint leads to enhanced resistance to both cleavage and ductile tearing. Recent developments on constraint-based fracture mechanics have enabled the practical assessment of defective components including the constraint effect. In fatigue analyses, it is common practice to use the Paris crack propagation law, which is based on the stress intensity factor alone. Although in recent years several research attempts have been made to investigate the effect of constraint on fatigue, how to quantify the effect of crack tip constraint on the fatigue crack propagation rate is still an open issue. In this paper, the effect of crack tip constraint on the fatigue crack propagation of small cracks at notched plates is investigated. A fatigue crack propagation rate model developed earlier which incorporates both low and high constraint conditions is used. It is shown that the effect of constraint on crack propagation rate is significant when the crack is small (within the stress concentration of the notches). This effect can be accounted for by using the fatigue crack propagation rate model.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFatigue and fracture mechanicsFrench-language works237,207