MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085752128 · doi:10.1115/pvp2012-78659

Simulation of Notch Tip Stress/Strain Response of Zirconium Pressure Tube Material

2012· article· en· W2085752128 on OpenAlexaff
Wolf Reinhardt, Preeti Doddihal, Sampath Ranganath

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNuclear Materials and Properties
Canadian institutionsKinectrics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShakedownMaterials scienceCoolantPressure vesselFinite element methodNeutron fluxStress (linguistics)Nuclear engineeringStructural engineeringStructural materialIrradiationComposite materialNeutronMechanical engineeringEngineeringNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Fitness-for-Service assessment of Zr 2.5Nb pressure tubes in CANDU reactors requires the evaluation of fatigue. As-designed, the pressure tubes do not contain notches, but in operation various degradation mechanisms, such as fretting and crevice corrosion, can generate flaws with small root radii. Since these flaws are exposed to the coolant, an assessment of environmental effects on fatigue life is needed, and fatigue tests are being conducted to obtain the fatigue curve. The pressure tubes are located in areas of high neutron flux, and thus the material is subject to irradiation effects. Since tests of irradiated material in reactor coolant environment are very difficult to conduct, a mechanistic understanding of fatigue at notches in Zr 2.5Nb material is sought, to allow the best possible use of fatigue tests of irradiated material in air and unirradiated material in water. As part of the effort to develop a mechanistic understanding, continuum-level simulations of the mechanical behaviour of unirradiated and irradiated Zr 2.5Nb material were performed using finite element analyses. Both monotonic and cyclic runs were conducted to investigate the difference between first-cycle and shakedown behaviour near the notch tip. To increase confidence in the result, finite element notch strain predictions were benchmarked with a Neuber notch strain model. The paper discusses observations and possible consequences of these simulations.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNuclear Materials and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207