Local Ratcheting at the Notch Region of Non-Press-Fitted and Press-Fitted Al 7075-T6 Samples Undergoing Asymmetric Stress Cycles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study evaluated the ratcheting response of notched and press-fitted Al 7075-T6 specimens under stress-controlled asymmetric cycles. The degree of the interference fit (DIF) directly influenced the magnitude and the rate of progressive plastic strain at the notch edge region. Local ratcheting at the hole–pin interference region was analyzed by means of two kinematic-hardening rules—the Ahmadzadeh–Varvani (A–V) rule and the Chaboche rule—coupled with the Neuber rule. Ratcheting strains at the notch root of aluminum samples with DIF = 0 (non-press-fitting samples) were measured and found to be the highest in magnitude. For the press-fitted samples, however, ratcheting strains dropped noticeably as the DIF increased from 1% to 2%. The press-fitting process plastically deformed the perimeter edges of the notches and improved the materials strength locally at the notch edges, resulting in better resistance against ratcheting progress. Local ratcheting strains at distances of 0.5, 1.3, and 3.0 mm from the notch roots were predicted for both pinned and unpinned samples via the hardening rules and were compared with those of measured ratcheting values. The ratcheting curves predicted by means of the A-V and Chaboche hardening rules closely agreed with the experimental data. The predicted ratcheting curves were positioned, respectively, above and below the measured ratcheting data.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".