The role of high cycle fatigue (HCF) onset in Francis runner reliability
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Cycle Fatigue (HCF) plays an important role in Francis runner reliability. This paper presents a model in which reliability is defined as the probability of not exceeding a threshold above which HCF contributes to crack propagation. In the context of combined Low Cycle Fatigue (LCF) and HCF loading, the Kitagawa diagram is used as the limit state threshold for reliability. The reliability problem is solved using First-Order Reliability Methods (FORM). A study case is proposed using in situ measured strains and operational data. All the parameters of the reliability problem are based either on observed data or on typical design specifications. From the results obtained, we observed that the uncertainty around the defect size and the HCF stress range play an important role in reliability. At the same time, we observed that expected values for the LCF stress range and the number of LCF cycles have a significant influence on life assessment, but the uncertainty around these values could be neglected in the reliability assessment.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it