Benefits of Ultrasonic Peening Treatment in Fatigue Improvement of Welded Elements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Ultrasonic Peening (UP) is one of new and promising processes for fatigue life improvement of welded elements and structures. During the different stages of its development the UP process was also known as ultrasonic treatment (UT), ultrasonic impact treatment (UIT), ultrasonic impact peening (UIP). The beneficial effect of UP is achieved mainly by relieving of harmful tensile residual stresses and introducing of compressive residual stresses into surface layers of material, decreasing of stress concentration in weld toe zones and enhancement of mechanical properties of the surface layers of the material. The results of fatigue testing of welded elements made of regular and high strength steels in as-welded condition and after application of UP will be presented. The yield strength of considered materials varied from 250–350 MPa to 700–1000 MPa. It is shown that UP is the most effective and economic technique for increasing of fatigue strength of welded elements in materials of different strength. These results also show a strong tendency of increased fatigue strength of welded elements after application of UP with the increase in mechanical properties of the material used. It allows using to a greater degree the advantages of the HSS in welded elements, subjected to fatigue loading.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".