MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Delayed Hydride Cracking Initiation at Simulated Debris Fretting Flaws in Zr-2.5Nb Alloys

2006· article· en· W2313546253 on OpenAlexaff
Jun Cui, Gordon K. Shek, Douglas A. Scarth, Zhirui Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNuclear Materials and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoKinectrics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceCrackingHydrogenPrecipitationMetallurgyHydrideAlloyTemperature cyclingRADIUSFracture (geology)Composite materialThermalMetalThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flaws in Zr-2.5Nb alloy pressure tubes in CANDU nuclear reactors are susceptible to a crack initiation and growth mechanism known as Delayed Hydride Cracking (DHC), which is a repetitive process that involves hydrogen diffusion, hydride precipitation, growth and fracture of the hydrided region at the flaw-tip. In-service flaw evaluation requires an analysis to demonstrate DHC will not initiate from the flaw. The work presented in this paper examines DHC initiation behavior from simulated debris fretting flaws. Groups of cantilever beam specimens containing V-notches with root radii of 15, 30 and 100 μm were prepared from two unirradiated pressure tubes hydrided to a nominal hydrogen concentration of 57 wt. ppm. The specimens were loaded to different stress levels that straddled the threshold value predicted by an engineering model, and subjected to multiple thermal cycles relevant to reactor operating conditions to form hydrides at the flaw-tip. Threshold conditions for DHC initiation were established for the flaw geometries and thermal cycling conditions used in this program. Test results indicate that the susceptibility to DHC initiation was affected by material variability and notch root radius. The results are also compared with model predictions.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0030.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.212 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNuclear Materials and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207