MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163979478 · doi:10.4271/2011-01-0487

Fatigue Life Predictions under General Multiaxial Loading Based on Simple Material Properties

2011· article· en· W2163979478 on OpenAlexaff
Nima Shamsaei, Ali Fatemi

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE International Journal of Materials and Manufacturing · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsChrysler (Canada)
FundersUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignÉlectricité de FranceUniversity of Toledo
KeywordsSimple (philosophy)Materials scienceStructural engineeringComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">A procedure for fatigue life estimation of components and structures under variable amplitude multiaxial loadings based on simple and commonly available material properties is presented. Different aspects of the analysis consisting of load cycle counting method, plasticity model, fatigue damage parameter, and cumulative damage rule are presented. The only needed material properties for the proposed procedure are hardness and monotonic and axial cyclic deformation properties (<i>HB, K</i>, <i>n</i>, <i>K′</i> and <i>n′</i>). Rainflow cycle counting method is used for identifying number of cycles. Non-proportional cyclic hardening is estimated from monotonic and axial cyclic deformation behaviors. A critical plane approach is used to quantify fatigue damage under variable amplitude multiaxial loading, where only material hardness is used to estimate the fatigue curve, and where the needed deformation response is estimated based on Tanaka's non-proportionality parameter. The commonly used linear damage rule is then used as a cumulative damage rule, to predict fatigue life. This procedure, when compared to experimental results, is shown to yield reasonably accurate predictions under some challenging axial-torsion loading conditions for a medium carbon steel with no non-proportional hardening, and a stainless steel with significant non-proportional hardening.</div></div>

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 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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE International Journal of Materials and ManufacturingSame topicFatigue and fracture mechanicsFrench-language works237,207