Fracture Characterization of Automotive Alloys in Shear Loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two different shear sample geometries were employed to investigate the elastoplastic and failure behaviour of three automotive alloy rolled sheets; a highly anisotropic magnesium alloy (ZEK100) and two relatively isotropic dual phase steels (DP600 and DP780). The performance of the so-called butterfly type specimen (Mohr and Henn 2007, Dunand and Mohr 2011) was evaluated at quasi-static conditions along with the shear geometry of Peirs et al. (2012) using in situ 3-D digital image correlation (DIC) strain measurement techniques. It was shown that both test geometries resulted in similar trends of the load-displacement response; however, the fracture strains obtained using the butterfly specimen were lower for the ZEK100 and DP780. It was demonstrated that the ZEK100 exhibits strong anisotropy in terms of the shear work hardening rate and failure strain. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) images of the fracture surfaces revealed that both shear specimens led to a smooth fracture surface compared to the dimpled fracture surface obtained in uniaxial tension.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".