MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068203055 · doi:10.1179/cmq.2003.42.3.333

AUSTENITIC MANGANESE STEELS – DEVELOPMENTS FOR HEAVY HAUL RAIL TRANSPORTATION

2003· article· en· W2068203055 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Richard W. Smith, W.B.F. Mackay

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Metallurgical Quarterly · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of Steels
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlloyMetallurgyAusteniteMaterials scienceToughnessManganeseWeldingHumanitiesArtMicrostructure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1882, Sir Thomas Hadfield patented an alloy with quite remarkable properties. Its composition was Fe-1.3%C-13%Mn and it was the toughest alloy known! The claim has stuck for the century since then and the alloy is now used universally for the “frog” in railway crossings in countries such as Canada where heavy loads are moved by rail using high axle loading. In fact, the alloy is very soft when cast, but hardens rapidly when deformed.The work described has been concerned with modifying the composition of the alloy in order to trade some of the enormous toughness for improved deformation and abrasion resistance in the as-cast condition. Since these frogs are usually rebuilt by arc welding, this too was examined in the test alloys. Recommendations are made for small metallic additions, improved heat treatment and an improved welding rod composition for use in rebuilding damaged Hadfield’s steel frogs.En 1882, Sir Thomas Hadfield a breveté un alliage ayant des propriétés bien remarquables. Sa composition était Fe-1.3%C-13%Mn et c’était l’alliage le plus résilient qui soit! La revendication a tenu tout le siècle qui a suivi et l’alliage est maintenant utilisé universellement pour le coeur d’aiguillage dans les croisements de chemin de fer dans des pays comme le Canada où des charges lourdes sont déplacées par rail en utilisant une charge élevée par essieu. En fait, l’alliage est très mou lorsqu’il est coulé mais il durcit rapidement lorsqu’il est déformé.Le travail décrit concerne la modification de la composition de l’alliage afin d’échanger un peu de l’énorme résilience contre une amélioration de la déformation et de la résistance à l’abrasion sous la condition de brut de coulée. Puisque ces coeurs d’aiguillage sont habituellement remis en état par le soudage à l’arc, on a également examiné cela dans les alliages évalués. On recommande de petites additions métalliques, un traitement thermique amélioré et une composition améliorée de la baguette de soudure pour utilisation dans la remise en état de coeurs d’aiguillage endommagés en acier de Hadfield.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.912

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations18
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Metallurgical QuarterlySame topicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of SteelsFrench-language works237,207