Multi-scale Analysis of Void Closure for Heavy Ingot Hot Forging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A multi-scale model towards simulating the void closure during hot forging was introduced in the present study and the derived void evolution model was programmed into commercial code DEFORM to simulate the void closure behavior in heavy ingot during the upsetting and blocking processes. From the simulation results, it can be concluded that: (1) the cymbal-shaped die is good at closing voids not only near the die but also around the axis of the ingot when the reduction is 36% in the upsetting process, (2) the effectiveness of V-shaped die is the best for consolidating voids around the axis and near the die when the reduction is 24% in a single blocking process, however, at about 22% reduction after 90° rotate, the void-closed regions become quite large around the axis both for flat dies and FML dies and the loads are much lower than those of V-shaped dies. Upon that, void closure in multi-stroke and multi-pass forging was also discussed. The multi-scale model and simulation results provide valuable sources of reference for design and optimization of die shapes and pass schedules for heavy ingots during hot working processes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".