MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009992841 · doi:10.4271/2013-01-0949

Austempering Process for Carburized Low Alloy Steels

2013· article· en· W2009992841 on OpenAlexaff
Rebeca Lumbreras, Xichen Sun, Gary Barber, Qian Zou

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of Steels
Canadian institutionsChrysler (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetallurgyMaterials scienceAlloyAustemperingProcess (computing)AusteniteComputer scienceBainiteMicrostructure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a continual need to apply heat treatment processes in innovative ways to optimize material performance. One such application studied in this research is carburizing followed by austempering of low carbon alloy steels, AISI 8620, AISI 8822 and AISI 4320, to produce components with high strength and toughness. This heat treatment process was applied in two steps; first, carburization of the surface of the parts, second, the samples were quenched from austenitic temperature at a rate fast enough to avoid the formation of ferrite or pearlite and then held at a temperature just above the martensite starting temperature to partially or fully form bainite. Any austenite which was not transformed during austempering, upon further cooling formed martensite or was present as retained austenite. The final result was a high-carbon surface layer of bainite or martensite which is expected to have good wear and fatigue resistance and a low carbon bainite and/or martensite core to provide toughness. The effect of the austempering temperature and time was studied for the three types of steel. A combination of three austempering temperatures, 260, 288 and 304°C and three times 1, 2 and 4 hours provided seven different heat treatments that were applied to the three types of alloy steel selected for the tests. Charpy tests were done on all the heat-treated steels to determine the differences in toughness due to the material and heat treatment conditions. The surface hardness and the geometric distortion were measured as well. The results obtained for the carburize/austemper process were compared to results obtained for the more traditional carburize/quench/temper process. One of the important conclusions was that the distortion produced by the carburize/austemper process was significantly less than the distortion produced by the carburize/quench/temper process. The results can be used to help select the best heat treatment conditions and materials for applications that include transmission shafts, output shafts, pump shafts, differential pinions, splines and parking pawls.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.224
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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