MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1588594162 · doi:10.4271/2004-01-0185

Ultra-High Speed Machining of A356-T6 Aluminum Alloy for Automotive Applications

2004· article· en· W1588594162 on OpenAlexaff
M.A. Elbestawi, Mihaela Dumitrescu

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Surface Polishing Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMachiningAutomotive industryAluminiumAlloyMaterials scienceAutomotive engineeringMetallurgyMechanical engineeringEngineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advanced manufacturing technology of high silicon aluminium alloys is one of the manufacturing processes in need of new developments to obtain the required improvements for the new generation of vehicles. During ultra high speed machining of aluminium alloys, the optimum machining parameters and tool geometry are controlled by the finished machined workpiece/part surface integrity, burr formation, and part distortion. For the research objectives presented in this paper a dual approach was applied, covering both experimental and theoretical (modeling) work. High speed machining, above 5000 m/min, has been used. From experimental analysis, the most important elements regarding tool life and wear mechanisms are workpiece material microstructure and inhomogenities, non-metallic inclusions, and silicon content. Finite element analysis showed that when the flank wear was > 0.2 mm, the tensile residual stress magnitude and penetrated depth into the workpiece material increases, affecting the fatigue performance. The burr height increased with less positive rake angle and higher flank wear length.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicAdvanced Surface Polishing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207