Damage and Fracture during Contact between a Spherical Indenter and Ice: Experimental Results and Finite Element Simulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effective modeling of ice material behavior requires treatment of both damage and fracture. In this paper, a discussion of local ice damage and fracture processes observed during laboratory-scale indentation experiments conducted on unconfined polycrystalline ice using a spherical indenter is provided. Particular emphasis is placed on the interplay between fracture and extrusion processes corresponding to the failure of ice under a single zone of high contact pressure. Simulations have been conducted using a continuum damage mechanics user-material routine in conjunction with element removal techniques to simulate pressure-softening and discrete fracture processes, respectively. Simulation results provide good agreement with test data and provide important insights into interplay between damage and fracture mechanisms associated with compressive ice failure. Finite element modeling was found to work well for modeling pressure softening effects and for replicating the effects of discrete fracture events. For interactions involving multiple failure events, further work is needed to develop models that account for random aspects of fracture associated with flaw structure, contact geometry and the geometry of individual spalls.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".