Development of an equation for aluminum alloys to determine the width of the zone affected by welding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian Standards Association standard CAN3-S157-M83 (R2002), Strength design in aluminum, requires that the zone affected by welding be taken to extend a distance of 25 mm each side from the centre of the weld. The objective of this investigation was to develop an equation to determine the width of the zone affected by welding adjacent to a weld for a given set of parameters. One hundred and twelve weldment specimens were fabricated using five alloys, seven material thicknesses, and different heat fluxes. Hardness was measured in the zone affected by welding to determine the width and hardness gradient. The investigation has determined that the width of the zone affected by welding depends on several parameters. The heat flux has the greatest influence on the width of the zone affected by welding. Factors such as plate thickness, thermal conductivity, and multipass welding also have an effect on the width of the zone affected by welding. It is concluded based on this investigation that the width of the zone affected by welding can be reduced substantially in welded connections fabricated using properly selected weldable aluminum alloys and thicknesses and an automatic process mode with a low and uniform heat flux.Key words: aluminum alloys, hardness, heat flux, welding.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".