MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048200644 · doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2010.03.089

Effect of pin tool thread orientation on fatigue strength of friction stir welded AZ31B-H24 Mg butt joints

2010· article· en· W2048200644 on OpenAlexafffund
Shahereen Chowdhury, D.L. Chen, S.D. Bhole, X. Cao

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Welding Techniques Analysis
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWeldingFriction stir weldingThread (computing)Materials scienceMetallurgyFatigue limitComposite materialMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the fatigue resistance of friction stir welded (FSWed) AZ31B-H24 Mg alloy butt joints with emphasis on the effect of pin tool thread orientation (right-hand thread (RHT) and left-hand thread (LHT)) in the clockwise rotation. The friction stir welding resulted in recrystallized grains in the stir zone (SZ) and thermomechanicallyaffected zone (TMAZ), and partially recrystallized grains in the heat-affected zone (HAZ), with the lowest hardness appeared in the SZ. The fatigue life after friction stir welding was observed to be lower at high stress amplitudes, but remained nearly the same at low stress amplitudes. Fatigue strength was higher in the FSWed joints made with the LHT pin tool than with the RHT pin tool due to the elimination of the welding defects near the bottom surface via a downward material flow. Fatigue fracture basically occurred at or near the boundary between TMAZ and SZ. Fatigue crack initiated from the specimen surface or near surface defects in the case of LHT pin tool, and from the welding defects near the bottom surface in the case of RHT pin tool. Crack propagation was characterized by the formation of fatigue striations.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations43
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Welding Techniques AnalysisFrench-language works237,207