MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138596543 · doi:10.1111/ffe.12143

Simulation of ductile crack propagation and determination of CTOAs in pipeline steels using cohesive zone modelling

2014· article· en· W2138596543 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Dunbar, Xin Wang, W. R. Tyson, Su Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueFatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCarleton University
FundersAustralian Government
KeywordsCohesive zone modelMaterials scienceToughnessFracture mechanicsFracture toughnessStructural engineeringComposite materialMetallurgyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This paper presents recent results of numerical studies on stable crack extension of high toughness steels typical of those in modern gas pipelines using cohesive zone modelling (CZM). The main focus of the work is on the determination of crack‐tip opening angles (CTOAs) of these steels from CZM. Two sets of materials are modelled. The first material set models a typical structural steel, with variable toughness described by four traction–separation (TS) laws. The second set models an X70 pipe steel, with three different TS laws. For each TS law, there are three defining parameters: the maximum cohesive strength, the final separation and the work of separation. The specimens analysed include a crack in an infinite plate (small‐scale yielding, SSY) and a standard drop‐weight tear test (DWTT). Fracture propagation characteristics and values of CTOA are obtained from these two types of specimens. It is shown that cohesive zone models can be successfully used to simulate ductile crack propagation and to numerically measure CTOAs. The ductile crack propagation characteristics and CTOAs obtained from SSY and DWTT specimens are compared for each set of steels. In addition, the CTOA results from numerical CZM of DWTT specimens of X70 steel are compared with those from laboratory tests.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations29
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & StructuresSame topicFatigue and fracture mechanicsFrench-language works237,207