Neutron Diffraction Studies of Residual Stresses Around Gouges and Gouged Dents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The residual stress pattern surrounding gouges is complex and, to date, has not been accurately modeled using stress modeling software. Thus measurement of these stress distributions is necessary. Neutron diffraction is the only experimental method with the capability of directly evaluating residual strain throughout the entire thickness of a pipe wall, in and around dent or gouged regions. Neutron diffraction measurements were conducted at the NIST reactor on three gouged dents in X52 pipeline sections. These were part of a larger sample set examined as part of the comprehensive MD4-1 PRCI/DOT PHMSA project. Gouges contained in pipeline sections were termed BEA161 (primarily a gouge with little denting), and BEA178 (mild gouging, very large dent). Measurements were also conducted on a coupon sample – P22, that was created as part of an earlier study. For the moderate gouges with little or no associated denting (BEA161 and P22) the residual stress field was highly localized around the immediate gouge vicinity (except where there was some denting present). The through wall stress distributions were similar at most locations — characterized by neutral or moderate hoop and axial stresses (50–100MPa) at the outer wall surface (i.e. at the gouge itself) gradually becoming highly compressive (up to −600MPa) at the inner wall surface. The other sample (BEA178) exhibited a very mild gouge with significant denting, and the results were very different. The denting process associated with this kind of gouge+dent dominated the residual stresses, making the residual stress distribution very complex. In addition, rather than having a residual stress field that is localized in the immediate gouge vicinity, the varying stress distribution extends to the edge of the dented region..
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".