Residual Stress Measurements in an Autofrettage Tube Using Hole Drilling Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relieved strains due to drilling hole in a ring sample cut from an autofrettage cylinder are measured. Measured strains are then transformed to residual stresses using calibration constants and mathematical relations of elasticity based on ASTM standard recommendations (American Society for Testing and Materials, ASTM E 837-08, 2008, “Standard Test Method for Determining Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain-Gage Method,” American Society for Testing and Materials). The hydraulic autofrettage is pressurizing a closed-end long cylinder beyond its elastic limits and subsequently removing the pressure. In contrast to three-dimensional stress state in the autofrettage tube, the stress measurement in hole drilling method is performed on a traction free surface formed from cutting the ring sample. The process of cutting the ring sample from a long autofrettaged tube is simulated using finite element method (FEM) and the redistribution of the residual stress due to the cut is discussed. Hence, transformation of the hole drilling measurements on the ring slice to the autofrettage residual stresses is revealed. The residual stresses are also predicted by variable material properties (VMP) method (Jahed, H., and Dubey, R. N., 1997, “An Axisymmetric Method of Elastic-Plastic Analysis Capable of Predicting Residual Stress Field,” Trans. ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 119, pp. 264–273) using real loading and unloading behavior of the test material. Prediction results for residual hoop stress agree very well with the measurements. However, radial stress predictions are less than measured values particularly in the middle of the ring. To remove the discrepancy in radial residual stresses, the measured residual hoop stress that shows a self-balanced distribution was taken as the basis for calculating residual radial stresses using field equations of elasticity. The obtained residual stresses were improved a lot and were in good agreement with the VMP solution.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".