Stress intensity factor computation of inclined cracked tension plate using XFEM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the major successes in the field of Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics (LEFM) is the groundwork of the stress intensity factor (SIF) computation. The approaches used to carry out SIF values may be analytical, semi-analytical, experimental or numerical. Each one of the above methods has its own benefits however the use of numerical solutions has become the most frequent and popular. Numerous schemes for the numerical computation of SIF have been developed, the J-integral method being the most popular one. In this article we examine the SIFs of an edge cracked two dimensional (2-D) steel plate subjected to tensile loading. Extended finite element (XFEM) computational scheme has been employed to estimate the values of SIF. The SIF values of cracks with different lengths and inclination angles (different configurations) have been examined by utilizing the domain based interaction integral approach. The effect of crack inclination and crack position on SIFs (KI and KII) has also been studied. The results obtained in this study were compared with those from literature and theoretical values and observed that they are in close agreement.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".