MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066299645 · doi:10.4271/2014-01-0990

Effect of Fiber Laser Welding on the Fatigue Properties of Dissimilar Welded Joints between DP980 and HSLA Steels

2014· article· en· W2066299645 on OpenAlexafffund
D. Parkes, Qingling Cui, D. Westerbaan, S.S. Nayak, Y. Zhou, Frank Goodwin, Daniel Liu, Sanjiwan Bhole, D.L. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWelding Techniques and Residual Stresses
Canadian institutionsTeck (Canada)University of WaterlooToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWeldingMaterials scienceMetallurgyFiber laserFiberComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advanced high strength steels (AHSS) such as dual phase (DP) steels are now being extensively used to achieve light weighting goals of vehicles because of their attractive combination of formability and high strength. High strength low alloy (HSLA) steels are also used in lightweight bodies-in-white; DP and HSLA steels are therefore often laser butt-welded together into tailor welded blanks and to create other joints. Among the laser welding processes, fiber laser welding (FLW) has been shown to provide excellent quality welds, including superior weld mechanical properties, at higher speeds than those possible with other laser welding processes. Using dissimilarly welded DP980-HSLA blanks made with different welding parameters, the tensile properties were found to not change in spite of the HSLA being weaker than the soft zone on the DP980 side of the weld. The high heat input weld was found to have more softening in comparison to its base metal (BM) (55 HV versus 46 HV) and less bainite (8% versus 15%) in its FZ in comparison to the low heat input weld. The fatigue properties of the high heat input weld were also found to be better than those of the low heat input weld.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicWelding Techniques and Residual StressesFrench-language works237,207