Reliability Assessment of Graphite Specimens under Multiaxial Stresses
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
An investigation was conducted to predict the failure strength response of IG-100 nuclear grade graphite exposed to multiaxial stresses. As part of this effort, a review of failure criteria accounting for the stochastic strength response is provided. The experimental work was performed in the early 1990s at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) on hollow graphite tubes under the action of axial tensile loading and internal pressurization. As part of the investigation, finite-element analysis (FEA) was performed and compared with results of FEA from the original ORNL report. The new analysis generally compared well with the original analysis, although some discrepancies in the location of peak stresses was noted. The Ceramics Analysis and Reliability Evaluation of Structures Life prediction code (CARES/Life) was used with the FEA results to predict the quadrants I (tensile-tensile) and quadrant IV (compression-tension) strength response of the graphite tubes for the principle of independent action (PIA), the Weibull normal stress averaging (NSA), and the Batdorf multiaxial failure theories. The CARES/Life reliability analysis showed that all three failure theories gave similar results in quadrant I but that in quadrant IV, the PIA and Weibull normal stress-averaging theories were not conservative, whereas the Batdorf theory was able to correlate well with experimental results. The conclusion of the study was that the Batdorf theory should generally be used to predict the reliability response of graphite and brittle materials in multiaxial loading situations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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