MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Perspectives for the Application of Variable Thickness Aluminium Tubes in Hydroforming of Complex Tubes

2011· article· en· W2079135780 on OpenAlexafffund
R. Bihamta, Quang Hien Bui, Michel Guillot, Guillaume D’Amours, Ahmed Rahem, Mario Fafard

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials science forum · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMaterial Selection and Properties
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaUniversité Laval
FundersNational Research Council CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsHydroformingTube (container)Materials scienceBendingAluminiumStructural engineeringRoofMechanical engineeringComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tubular products have very important applications in various areas especially in the transportation industries. For instance, in the structure of cars there are various tubular products like roof headers, engine cradles, roof rails and frame rails with complex geometries which most of them need multiple steps like tube drawing, tube bending and hydroforming for their production. Based on the recent studies by this group, it was proven that in most of the structural tubular parts in the cars it was not necessary to have constant thickness along the axial direction of tube and it will be considered as overdesign and the overall weight of structures can be reduced considerably by using variable thickness tubes. In this paper, the variable thickness tube drawing and its applications in the tube bending and hydroforming applications were studied. The results showed that this process can have important role in reduction of defective parts in the production of complex tubes by the tube hydroforming method. However especial considerations should be taken into account in the design of thickness distribution along axial direction of these kinds of tubes to avoid problems in the drawing step and as well in the bending and hydroforming steps.

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)0.001
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials science forumSame topicMaterial Selection and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207