MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131689454 · doi:10.5267/j.esm.2013.08.005

Failure curves for predicting brittle fracture in V-notched structural components loaded under mixed tension/shear: An advanced engineering design package

2013· article· en· W2131689454 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
A.R. Torabi

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Solid Mechanics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrittlenessMaterials scienceShear (geology)Brittle fractureTension (geology)Fracture (geology)Composite materialStructural engineeringUltimate tensile strengthEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerous failure curves are presented in this manuscript to predict the onset of sudden fracture in V-notched brittle materials under combined tension-shear loading conditions. The curves were developed in a computational manner in terms of the notch stress intensity factors and based on the suitable failure concept of the maximum tangential stress (MTS) utilized frequently in the past by the author and his co-researchers for predicting mixed mode brittle fracture in extensive notched specimens. Three extensively used notch angles and various notch tip radii were considered in the computations. A wide range of brittle materials were also taken into account by defining and using the material critical distance. Through predicting loadbearing capacity and notch bifurcation angle utilizing only the two basic material properties namely the ultimate tensile strength and the plane-strain fracture toughness, engineers can design more rapidly and conveniently the V-notched brittle components with the aim to withstand reliably against sudden fracture. }}

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations15
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngineering Solid MechanicsSame topicFatigue and fracture mechanicsFrench-language works237,207