MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136422053 · doi:10.1115/1.2042480

An Analytical Solution for Evaluating Gasket Stress Change in Bolted Flange Connections Subjected to High Temperature Loading

2005· article· en· W2136422053 on OpenAlexaff
Abdel‐Hakim Bouzid, Akli Nechache

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pressure Vessel Technology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Structural Analysis Methods
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGasketFlangeStructural engineeringJoint (building)Finite element methodBolted jointStress (linguistics)Materials scienceMechanical jointFlexibility (engineering)EngineeringComposite materialMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The tightness of bolted flanged joints subjected to elevated temperature is not properly addressed by flange design codes. The development of an analytical method based on the flexibility of the different joint components and their elastic interaction could serve as a powerful tool for elevated temperature flange designs. This paper addresses the effect of the internal fluid operating temperature on the variation of the bolt load and consequently on the gasket stress in bolted joints. The theoretical analysis used to predict the gasket load variation as a result of unequal radial and axial thermal expansion of the joint elements is outlined. It details the analytical basis of the elastic interaction model and the thermally induced deflections that are used to evaluate the load changes. Two flange joint type configurations are treated: a joint with identical pair of flanges and a joint with a cover plate. The analytical models are validated and verified by comparison to finite element results.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations39
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pressure Vessel TechnologySame topicEngineering Structural Analysis MethodsFrench-language works237,207