MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126572700 · doi:10.1051/jp4:2006134008

High rate constitutive modeling of aluminium alloy tube

2006· article· en· W2126572700 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal de Physique IV (Proceedings) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicHigh-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAluminiumConstitutive equationAlloyMaterials scienceTube (container)MetallurgyAluminium alloyMechanicsComposite materialThermodynamicsFinite element methodPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the need for fuel efficient automobiles increases, car designers are investigating light-weight materials for automotive bodies that will reduce the overall automobile weight. Aluminium alloy tube is a desirable material to use in automotive bodies due to its light weight. However, aluminium suffers from lower formability than steel and its energy absorption ability in a crash event after a forming operation is largely unknown. As part of a larger study on the relationship between crashworthiness and forming processes, constitutive models for 3mm AA5754 aluminium tube were developed. A nominal strain rate of 100/s is often used to characterize overall automobile crash events, whereas strain rates on the order of 1000/s can occur locally. Therefore, tests were performed at quasi-static rates using an Instron test fixture and at strain rates of 500/s to 1500/s using a tensile split Hopkinson bar. High rate testing was then conducted at rates of 500/s, 1000/s and 1500/s at 21°C, 150°C and 300°C. The generated data was then used to determine the constitutive parameters for the Johnson-Cook and Zerilli-Armstrong material models.

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.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.961

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.239 · 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