MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1525130973 · doi:10.4271/2005-01-0493

On the Use of the Shear Punch Experiments in Determining Mechanical Properties of Various Dual Phase Steels

2005· article· en· W1525130973 on OpenAlexafffund
Wael Dabboussi, Jinbo Qu, J.A. Nemes, Stephen Yue

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of Steels
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersAUTO21 Network of Centres of ExcellenceNetworks of Centres of Excellence of Canada
KeywordsShear (geology)Dual (grammatical number)Materials sciencePhase (matter)Dual-phase steelComposite materialMechanical engineeringEngineeringMicrostructurePhysicsMartensite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dual phase steels are being extensively considered as a structural material for automobiles because of the favourable combination of strength and formability. Crashworthiness of these new steels is an area of great importance. High strain rate testing is one approach to measure the ability of materials to absorb energy in a crash situation. The objective of this paper is to examine the effect of the deformation rate on the mechanical properties of dual-phase and multi-phase steels. Shear-punch experiments are conducted both at quasi-static and dynamic rates for this purpose. The ease of preparation of shear punch specimens compared to the tension specimen makes this approach attractive in evaluating key mechanical properties, such as ultimate tensile strength (UTS) and ductility limits, of automotive materials mostly in sheet forms. A qualitative correlation between the quasi-static shear punch and tension experiments results is made, and parallels of this correlation are considered for the dynamic rates of deformation. A servo hydraulic MTS machine is used for performing the quasi-static experiments, with a special fixture for the shear tests, while the high rate experiments are conducted using the shear version of the Split Hopkinson Pressure Bars (SHPB) setup. Dual phase steels DP600/300 and DP600/400 are tested as well as alternate microstructure dual phase steels with different fractions of martensite obtained by changing the intercritical annealing temperature and water quenching.

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)0.002
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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.206 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of SteelsFrench-language works237,207