Stress Intensity Correction Factors for Radial-Longitudinal Surface Cracks in Thick-Walled Cylinders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Section XI and Appendix D of Section VIII, Div. 3 of the ASME Code include an influence coefficients method for calculating Mode I crack tip stress intensity factors, K1. When outlining the technical basis for this method, Cippola mentions that the fiee surface correction factors G0, G1, G2 and G3, that are tabulated for uniform, linear, quadratic and cubic stress variations, respectively, were derived using Shen and Glinka’s weight functions for surface cracks in plates. In the interim, the authors and colleagues have extended the validity range of their weight functions for cracks in plates and developed solutions for internal or external cracks in thin- or thick-walled vessels. This paper is a comprehensive comparison of correction factors, Gi, obtained from weight functions for an edge or surface semi-elliptic crack in a plate with those obtained for a radial-longitudinal edge or surface semi-elliptic crack in a cylinder. The differences, which in some cases are large, and the well know uncertainties when calculating K1 for the surface points of cracks are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".