MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1858017352 · doi:10.4271/2004-01-0835

Application of Damage Models in Bending and Hydroforming of Aluminum Alloy Tube

2004· article· en· W1858017352 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal Forming Simulation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlloyHydroformingAluminiumTube (container)Materials scienceBendingMetallurgyStructural engineeringComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="htmlview paragraph">This paper examines the application of damage models in tube bending and subsequent hydroforming of AlMg3.5Mn aluminum alloy tubes. An in-house Gurson-based damage model, incorporated within LS-DYNA, has been used for the simulations. The applied damage model contains several void nucleation and growth parameters that must be determined for each material. A simpler straight tube hydroforming process was considered first to check the damage parameters and predicted ductility. Then the model was applied to a sequence of bending and hydroforming. The damage history from pre-bending was mapped to the hydroforming stage, to allow prediction of the overall ductility. The applied forming parameters in the simulation were based on data extracted during the experimental tests. Finally, the numerical results were compared to the experimental data.</div>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.232 · 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