MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003884271 · doi:10.1179/026708303225010713

Mathematical model of deformation and microstructural evolution during hot rolling of aluminium alloy 5083

2003· article· en· W2003884271 on OpenAlexaff
Mary A. Wells, Daan M. Maijer, S. Jupp, G.T. Lockhart, M.R. van der Winden

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials Science and Technology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetallurgy and Material Forming
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceMicrostructureAluminiumMetallurgyDeformation (meteorology)Finite element methodAlloyAluminium alloyTemperature gradientStrain rateThermalComposite materialThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A mathematical model to predict the through thickness temperature, strain and strain rate distributions during hot rolling and the subsequent microstructure evolution was developed using the commercial finite element package ABAQUS. Microstructure evolution predictions included the amount of recrystallisation through the thickness of the sheet based on its thermomechanical history during rolling and thermal history after rolling. The equations used to predict the microstructure evolution were based on semiempirical relationships found in the literature for a 5083 aluminium alloy. Validation of the model predictions was done using comprehensive experimental measurements which were conducted using the Corus research multimill, a pilot scale experimental rolling facility, in Ijmuiden, The Netherlands. The results indicate that the through thickness temperature and strain distribution predictions for the rolling operation are reasonable. Hence, the boundary conditions used in the finite element model adequately represent the interface heat transfer and friction conditions. Microstructure predictions using the literature based equations significantly underestimate the amount of recrystallisation occurring in the sheet. A sensitivity analysis indicates that the recrystallisation kinetics are extremely sensitive to the fitting parameters used in the microstructure equation, and that the gradient in the recrystallisation kinetics is the result of the temperature gradient experienced by the specimen during deformation.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations31
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials Science and TechnologySame topicMetallurgy and Material FormingFrench-language works237,207