MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087167375 · doi:10.1115/1.4006489

A New Experimental Method for the Introduction of a Predetermined Amount of Residual Stresses in Fatigue Test Specimens

2012· article· en· W2087167375 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Paquet, Jacques Lanteigne, Marie Bernard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Mechanics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of Steels
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalHydro-Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceResidual stressInduction hardeningAusteniteInduction heatingFinite element methodAustenitic stainless steelMicrostructureUltimate tensile strengthMultiphysicsComposite materialMetallurgyStructural engineeringCorrosion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new experimental method for the incorporation of residual stresses (RS) in standard fatigue steels specimens was developed. RS were introduced by means of high frequency (360 kHz) induction heating. Surface tensile RS resulted from cooling down the specimen subjected to a high thermal gradient. To preserve the mechanical properties of the steel, it was necessary to circulate a coolant at the center of the specimen. The 304L austenitic stainless steel does not undergo phase transformation nor micro structural changes in the solid state and was thus selected for this purpose. Multiphysics finite element (FE) analysis was used to calculate the distributed RS in the fatigue samples. These calculations were compared to XRD measurements and a very good agreement was obtained. It was therefore demonstrated that RS induced with induction heating could be numerically assessed. This conditioning method was then proved efficient to study the only influence of a predetermined amount of RS on the fatigue properties of austenitic 304L steel without undergoing influences of other parameters such as microstructure, surface finish and geometry.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.738
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied MechanicsSame topicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of SteelsFrench-language works237,207