MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W35821011 · doi:10.1016/j.bjps.2022.05.002

Usage of the contour method in measuring residual stress in welding and peen-welding applications

2007· article· en· W35821011 on OpenAlexaff
Nasri Hassan, Jacques Lanteigne, Henri Champliaud

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWelding Techniques and Residual Stresses
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidual stressWeldingMaterials sciencePeeningStructural engineeringFinite element methodComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Residual stresses, which are inherent to many manufacturing processes, may considerably reduce the fatigue properties of mechanical systems. Welding is a process that induces residual stresses due to plastic deformation and phase changes, which take place within the heat-affected zone (HAZ). Mechanical surface treatments are often used to minimize or even reverse the tensile stresses due to welding. In this study the influence of peening on existing welding residual stresses, through all the plate thickness, is shown using the contour method. The contour method, the measurement protocol selected in this paper for estimating residual stresses, allows the assessment of these stresses over a whole cross-section, unlike other common methods which only provide limited local point measurements. This method is based on the relaxation of stresses resulting from EDM cutting. Displacements of the relaxed cross section are measured by a laser beam. The cut surface is treated and approximated through a polynomial surface, which is used to impose displacements on the nodes of a finite element model. The solution to this problem is the normal stress responsible for the released micro-displacements on the plane section cut. This method was applied on 516 carbon steel plates either in the as-welded condition or welded and peened.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWelding Techniques and Residual StressesFrench-language works237,207