MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116870844 · doi:10.1115/1.1593079

Hydraulic Versus Swage Autofrettage and Implications of the Bauschinger Effect

2003· article· en· W2116870844 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pressure Vessel Technology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and Detonation Processes
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwagingAutofrettageBauschinger effectTube (container)Materials scienceBroachingStructural engineeringComposite materialResidual stressEngineeringMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A hybrid method is presented which permits calculation of residual stresses in a swage autofrettaged tube including Bauschinger effect. The results are generally supported by three types of available experimental evidence by comparing “equivalent” swage and hydraulic autofrettage tubes having the same level of overstrain. Radial slitting of the swaged tube is predicted to show a greater opening angle than its hydraulic equivalent. Fatigue lifetime of the swaged tube is predicted to be significantly higher than the hydraulic case. Re-pressurization of the equivalent tubes is predicted to produce initial re-yielding at the same pressure in both cases. Analysis of results shows that permanent strains in the swaged tube are expected to appear at a pressure level below that for the hydraulic tube.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.554
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.222 · 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