MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2988537149 · doi:10.1115/1.4045449

Experimental and Numerical Investigation on Ductile Fracture of Steel Pipelines

2019· article· en· W2988537149 on OpenAlexaff
Nima Mohajer Rahbari, Mengying Xia, Xiaoben Liu, Jianwei Cheng, Samer Adeeb

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pressure Vessel Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal Forming Simulation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFracture toughnessMaterials scienceFracture (geology)Pipeline transportStructural engineeringFinite element methodStress (linguistics)Geotechnical engineeringComposite materialGeologyEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rupture of steel pipelines leads to the loss-of-containment that may be accompanied with loss of life or damage to property and environment. Therefore, the understanding of the fracture characteristics of steel grades used in the pipelines is essential for a safe and reliable design. In this study, a set of small-scale fracture tests was designed and conducted in order to characterize the fracture of X65 steel grade. The experimental results show that not only is the fracture strain dependent on the triaxial stress condition but also the three-dimensional nature of the stress field considerably affects the ductile fracture toughness. Moreover, parallel finite element (FE) simulation of experiments were conducted and a hybrid experimental–numerical approach was used to calibrate the Mohr–Coulomb fracture criterion and obtain the equivalent plastic strain to fracture of X65 steel as a three-dimensional function of stress triaxiality and Lode angle. An engineering application friendly ductile fracture model is proposed for X65 steel pipelines.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pressure Vessel TechnologySame topicMetal Forming Simulation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207