A Novel Method of Residual Strain Analysis Via a Non-Bonded Interface Technique in Combination With the Circular Grid Analysis Method
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A novel non-bonded interface technique (NBIT) is used to analyze internal residual strain by combining a pre-split sample of AISI 4340 steel with the circular grid residual strain analysis technique. NBIT is compared with an implicit non-linear finite element (FE) model using LS-DYNA. A split FE model was compared with a quarter FE model to determine the split interface that causes an average difference of 9.0% on the residual von Mises strain field from a 588.6 N indentation. The homogeneous FE quarter model was then compared with the experimental split model using 588.6, 981.0, and 1471.5 N indentation forces. An average displacement difference of 3.92 µm was found when comparing the experimental split and FE homogeneous samples from a 588.6 N indentation. The internal residual major and minor principal strains from the split experimental sample and homogeneous FE model were compared for each indentation force. The minor principal strain results show the 588.6, 981.0, and 1471.5 N indentation forces resulted in a difference between the experimental split and homogeneous FE model of 28.5%, 34.8%, and 26.0%, respectively. The difference between the comparisons was explained by the inability of the FE model to simulate local non-homogeneous material properties such as grain composition and orientation whereas NBIT does. NBIT can be used for micro- or macro-scale residual strain analysis as the spatial resolution is highly adjustable.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it