Stress Corrosion Cracking of Stainless Steels in High Temperature, High Purity Water under Constant Load Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Stress corrosion crack (SCC) growth rate tests were conducted on sensitized and non-sensitized stainless steels (Type 304, 304L) cold worked to levels between 18 and 28%. Compact tension specimens were actively loaded to a stress intensity factor of approximately 38 MPa√m and exposed to high temperature, high purity water at 360°C under constant load conditions. Specimens were also ring loaded to a K level of approximately 35 MPa√m and exposed to high temperature high purity water at 338°C. SCC was observed in every specimen test with the exception of the 304L specimen cold worked 18%. The crack front engagement was greater than 50% in all of the specimens that exhibited SCC with the exception of the non-sensitized Type 304 specimen that was cold worked 19%. Intergranular SCC can occur in heavily cold worked (30%) Type 304 and 304L stainless steel exposed to high temperature, high purity water under static loading conditions without the presence of anions at 360°C. These results show that intergranular SCC can occur in heavily cold worked (20-30%) Type 304 stainless steel exposed to high temperature, high purity water under static loading conditions without the presence of anions at 338°C. The measured SCC growth rates for non-sensitized Type 304 and 304L stainless steels were significantly below the SCC growth rates predicted for Alloy 600 under the same environmental and loading conditions. The measured SCC growth rate for sensitized Type 304 stainless steel was consistent with the SCC growth rate predicted for Alloy 600 under the same environmental and loading conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".