Effect Of Loading Strain Rates On Unloading Behavior Of Shot Peened Materials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shot peening is a process widely used in industry to improve the fatigue life of materials through induced compressive residual stresses that retard crack initiation and growth. In the peening process, there are two stages: 1) loading: shot penetrating into target; and 2) unloading: shot rebounding from the target. The strain rates in the loading process are known to be in 10 5 -10 6 1/s range, having heavy impact on the materials' properties. However, the effect of the loading strain rates on the rebounding stage is not well studied. This paper aims to determine the effects of the loading strain rates on the unloading behavior of a material using FEM method. First, to better understand the material behavior, this study evaluates the loading-unloading responses of one element at high strain rates in different scenarios. Then, it obtains the strain rates during the loading and unloading for the different elements of a material being impinged by one shot. The results show that the unloading behavior of a material depends only on the loading equivalent plastic strain and the strain rate of the unloading step.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".