MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030267951 · doi:10.12989/amr.2013.2.4.221

Mechanical and wear properties of Cu-Al-Ni-Fe-Sn-based alloy

2013· article· en· W2030267951 on OpenAlexaff
Mitsuhiro Okayasu, Daiki Izuka, Yushi Ninomiya, Yuki Manabe, Tetsuro Shiraishi

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in materials Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMetallurgy and Material Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceAlloyDuctility (Earth science)MetallurgyUltimate tensile strengthMicrostructureBrittlenessBronzePlasticityComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To obtain bronze with good mechanical properties and high wear resistance, a new bronze (CADZ) is proposed on the basis of various fundamental information. The CADZ consists of the elements Al10.5, Fe4.2, Sn3.7 and Ni3.1, and its design is based on Cu-Al10.5 alloy. The Cu-10.5%Al is very hard and brittle. To obtain the high material ductility of the Cu-10.5%Al alloy, an attempt was made to add a few percent of Sn. Moreover, to make high strength of the Cu alloy, microstructure with small grains was created by the proper amount of Fe and Ni (Fe/Ni = 0.89). The mechanical properties of the CADZ sample have been examined experimentally, and those were compared with commercial bronzes. The tensile strength and wear resistance of CADZ are higher than those for commercial bronzes. Although the ductility of CADZ is the lower level, the strain to failure of CADZ is about 2.0~5.0% higher than that for the Cu-Al10.5 alloy. Details of the microstructural effects on the mechanical properties in the CADZ sample were further discussed using various experimental results.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in materials ResearchSame topicMetallurgy and Material ScienceFrench-language works237,207