MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319068283 · doi:10.1115/pvp2008-61113

Residual Stress Modeling of Warm-Bent Tight-Radius CANDU Feeder Bends

2008· article· en· W2319068283 on OpenAlexafffund
Yuhan Ding, M. Yetisir

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
FundersCANDU Owners Group
KeywordsResidual stressPipingRADIUSMaterials scienceBendingResidualCrackingBent molecular geometryNeutron diffractionWork (physics)Structural engineeringStress (linguistics)Stress corrosion crackingDiffractionComposite materialEngineeringCorrosionMechanical engineeringPhysicsOpticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In one CANDU® nuclear station, a few feeder piping failures have occurred because of stress corrosion cracking. All the cracks were located in tight-radius bends. Root cause analyses indicated that the residual stress played a significant role in these failures. Residual stress measurements using the neutron diffraction technique have been performed to quantify the residual stresses for a large number of feeder bends. Numerical simulations have also been performed to supplement the measurement data. This paper presents the modeling work carried out for 2.5” warm-bent tight-radius feeder bends using LS-DYNA®. The warm-bending process was divided into heating, bending, springback and cooling stages. The simulation results were compared to the measurement data using the neutron diffraction technique. Good agreement was achieved between the trends of simulation results and the measured residual stresses in feeder bends. Additionally, it was found that the predicted cross-sectional shape and wall thickness distribution agreed well with the measurements. Limitations of the simulation work were summarized and recommendations for future research were made based on this study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFatigue and fracture mechanicsFrench-language works237,207