Design of New Multifunctional Galling-Corrosion Testing Apparatus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Galling of materials is a severe surface damage characterized by macroscopic material removal when two solid surfaces experience relative sliding under high load. This mode of wear is of particular interest in applications where design constraints require assembly components to slide against each other without adequate lubrication. Examples are high-pressure ball valve with metal-to-metal seal contact, sheet metal forming process and medical/food processing instruments where lubrication is sometimes non-existent due contamination concerns. In addition to sliding at high load, materials in these applications can be exposed to aggressive environments which lead to combined tribological and corrosive degradation phenomena. Progress in this field depends largely on the understanding of the interaction between corrosion and wear processes. In this paper, we describe a new testing instrument capable of testing galling and sliding wear behavior under dry and wet conditions. Design of this instrument is guided by ASTM standards G98 for galling, G99 for pin-on-disk, G133 for ball-on-flat and G199 for tribocorrosion. Galling configuration consists of two concentrically aligned hollow cylindrical specimen loaded along their longitudinal axis with constant load (max 5000 N). The upper specimen is held stationary while the lower specimen is rotated a number of cycles at a selected speed. During the test, the friction torque is measured using special torque/thrust load cell. For the combined galling/corrosion test, the specimen’s contact surface is submerged in an electrolytic solution and three-electrode type electrochemical cell is set-up using the specimens as working electrode. Galling/corrosion tests can be performed under open circuit potential or under controlled potentials. In the first type, the corrosion potential is monitored before, during and after rubbing, whereas in the second type, the corrosion potential and corrosion current are controlled before, during and after rubbing. In addition to galling, the instrument can also be used to conduct pin-on-disk and ball-on-flat tests under dry and wet conditions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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".