Fracture Toughness and Fracture Roughness Interrelationship in Thermally treated Westerly Granite
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
This paper presents an experimental work aimed at assessing the correlation between fracture toughness (K IC ) and fracture roughness for a series of Westerly granite specimens thermally treated up to 850°C. Mode I fracture toughness as a function of thermal treatment is determined using Cracked Chevron Notched Brazilian Disc specimens. The degree of roughness of the resultant fracture surfaces is analyzed with the aid of a high accuracy, high precision stereo-topometric measurement system. Roughness and toughness values display a negative correlation as a function of temperature. Fracture toughness decreases with increasing temperature due to the gradual opening of grain-grain boundaries in response to thermal stresses. Mode I fractures preferentially follow these weakened grain-grain boundaries, which in addition to the thermal expansion of individual grains, result in rougher failure profiles with increasing temperature. At low temperature, a distinct anisotropy in roughness was observed in all fracture surfaces with higher roughness value perpendicular to the direction of fracture propagation. However, higher treatment temperatures resulted in the homogenization of fracture roughness in all directions. These results confirm the important link among petrofabric analysis, fracture toughness, and fracture roughness in response to thermal treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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