MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W133432838 · doi:10.5006/c2006-06575

Chemistry Considerations of P1 Base Materials to Mitigate Hydrogen Embrittlement Exposure

2006· article· en· W133432838 on OpenAlexaff
A.C. Gysbers

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicHydrogen embrittlement and corrosion behaviors in metals
Canadian institutionsImperial Oil (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrogen embrittlementEmbrittlementHydrogenBase (topology)Materials scienceMetallurgyCorrosionChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The coarse grain heat affected zone of welded structures made of P1 Group 1 and 2 carbon manganese (C-Mn) steels of which ASTM A516 is a common plate specification is subject to formation of high hardness microstructures. This hardenability is a function primarily of the chemistry of the base metal and the t8/5 (800 to 500°C (1472 to 932°F)) cooling rates. This hard zone is subject to hydrogen embrittlement either during fabrication or during service exposure to corrosive environments. This paper reviews the various chemistry prediction tools for heat affected zone (HAZ) hardenability to determine if a rationale could be put forward to define a specific chemistry limit that could be defined by users such as a carbon equivalent (CE) to achieve an HVmax of 248 required by industry standards when exposed to service hydrogen embrittlement. A literature review of the evolution of weldability and hardenability models from 1940 to the present day reveals that there probably is too much spread in the models to readily identify a practical chemistry limit specification alone. The models though do help in understanding the combination of chemistry, post weld heat treatment and weld procedure control implications. Chemistry limits alone would not appear to be sufficient to ensure maximum hardness HAZ’s and supplemental post weld heat treatment and/or rigorous welding procedure controls should be specified. It is suggested that NACE RP0472 consider the concept of t8/5 cooling rate found in BS EN1011-2. Implications of chemistry on the postweld heat treatment (PWHT) and weld procedure controls are identified and suggestions made to consider for these HAZ hardness control options.

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)0.001
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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrogen embrittlement and corrosion behaviors in metals→French-language works237,207→