Investigating the Interaction Behavior Between Two Arbitrarily Oriented Surface Cracks Using Multilevel Substructuring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The existence of arbitrarily oriented multiple cracks is a common problem in brittle materials. Some of these materials, such as ceramics, are used in mechanical and aerospace structures that suffer from aging. Because of that, such structures have shown some signs of sudden partial or total failure. The interaction and coalescence of multiple cracks may significantly affect the designed lives of aging structures. Knowledge of the growth behavior of interacting cracks is still limited. In this paper, a novel submodeling meshing algorithm is used to construct different cases of arbitrarily oriented identical surface cracks in a plate subjected to remote tension. These cases are solved using finite element analysis (FEA) and covered a wide range of crack geometries. The stress intensity factors (SIFs) and the energy release rates (G) for these cracks are calculated as a function of their relative orientation and the position along the interaction crack-front. In this paper, the studied ratio of crack depth to plate thickness, a/t, and to crack length, a/c, are kept at 0.2 and 0.3, respectively. Where possible, a comparison of the 3-D results with 2-D ones is also considered.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".