Failure Mechanisms and Damage Model of Ductile Cast Iron under Low-Cycle Fatigue Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">Strain-controlled low-cycle fatigue (LCF) experiments were conducted on ductile cast iron at total strain rates of 1.2/min, 0.12/min and 0.012/min in a temperature range of RT ~ 800°C. An integrated creep-fatigue (ICF) life prediction framework is proposed, which embodies a deformation mechanism based constitutive model and a thermomechanical damage model. The constitutive model is based on the decomposition of inelastic deformation into plasticity and creep mechanisms, which can describe both rate-independent and rate-dependent cyclic responses under wide strain rate and temperature conditions. The damage model takes into consideration of i) plasticity-induced fatigue, ii) intergranular embrittlement, iii) creep and iv) oxidation. Each damage form is formulated based on the respective physical mechanism/strain. The overall damage accumulation follows a nonlinear interaction mechanism that represents the nucleation and propagation of a surface crack in coalescence with internally distributed damages (cracks/voids). For ductile cast iron (DCI), the model predicates that the room temperature deformation and LCF life are primarily driven by cyclic plasticity; but at 400°C, albeit the deformation is mainly plasticity, its LCF is limited by intergranular embrittlement. When the temperature is increased above 600°C, rate-dependent stress-strain behavior manifests due to creep, and the synergetic interaction of creep with oxidation dominates the LCF process. As a result of such interaction, a crossover-behavior between room temperature and high-temperature (≻600°C) strain-life relationships may occur, as observed in the experiments. The model prediction corroborates with the LCF test results and fractographic observations on the test coupons, which further substantiates the validity of the model.</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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".