MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283828734 · doi:10.18280/mmep.090305

A High-Accuracy Empirical Formula for the Strain Concentration Factor in Countersunk Holes

2022· article· en· W4283828734 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHashemite University
KeywordsFinite element methodIsotropyNonlinear systemMaterials scienceMathematicsRADIUSMathematical analysisStrain (injury)PhysicsThermodynamicsOpticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a modified high-accuracy empirical formula for the strain concentration factor in a centrally-placed countersunk holes in isotropic plate under uniaxial tension. Finite Element Method (FEM) was used to investigate the effect of the problem geometric parameters including, plate width and thickness, as well as the hole radius, countersinking depth and angle on the strain concentration factor. The important influence of Poisson’s ratio was also thoroughly discussed. Based on the FEM-generated data and nonlinear regression, a general and high-precision equation for the strain concentration factor was developed. The formulation process was based on producing a general formula for computing the strain concentration factor with unknown coefficients. Such coefficients are determined by minimizing the relative error between the fitted equation and the FE data using nonlinear least squares method. The results of this newly-developed equation were validated with FEA. The comparison showed high accuracy of the present equation in evaluating strain concentration factor in countersunk holes with a relative approximate error of less than 7%. Besides, this equation was efficiently employed to test the various geometric and material parameters on the strain concentration value of countersunk holes. The results of the present equation were compared to the results of older equation available in literature. The comparison proved much higher accuracy of the present equation in evaluating strain concentration factor especially for deeper and larger countersunk holes than the previously published formula.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.200 · 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