MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076811655 · doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2012.08.057

A 3-D coupled hydromechanical granular model for simulating the constitutive behavior of metallic alloys during solidification

2012· article· en· W2076811655 on OpenAlexaff
M. Sistaninia, A.B. Phillion, J.‐M. Drezet, M. Rappaz

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Materialia · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAluminum Alloy Microstructure Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCompetence Centre for Materials Science and Technology
KeywordsMaterials scienceIntergranular corrosionDeformation (meteorology)Composite materialShrinkageMechanicsLiquid metalPressure dropDrop (telecommunication)CompressibilityPorosityMetallurgyMicrostructureMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A three-dimensional (3-D) coupled hydromechanical granular model has been developed and validated to directly predict, for the first time, hot tear formation and stress–strain behavior in metallic alloys during solidification. This granular model consists of four separate 3-D modules: (i) the solidification module is used to generate the solid–liquid geometry at a given solid fraction; (ii) the fluid flow module (FFM) is used to calculate the solidification shrinkage and deformation-induced pressure drop within the intergranular liquid; (iii) the semi-solid deformation module (SDM) simulates the rheological behavior of the granular structure; and (iv) the failure module (FM) simulates crack initiation and propagation. Since solid deformation, intergranular flow and crack initiation are deeply linked together, the FFM, SDM and FM are coupled processes. This has been achieved through the development of a new three-phase interactive technique that couples the interaction between intergranular liquid, solid grains and growing voids. The results show that the pressure drop, and consequently hot tear formation, depends also on the compressibility of the mushy zone skeleton, in addition to the well-known contributors (lack of liquid feeding and semi-solid deformation).

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations52
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa MaterialiaSame topicAluminum Alloy Microstructure PropertiesFrench-language works237,207