MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2294500133 · doi:10.4271/2004-01-1051

Numerical and Experimental Investigation of 5xxx Aluminum Alloy Stretch Flange Forming

2004· article· en· W2294500133 on OpenAlexafffund
Zengtao Chen, Michael J. Worswick, O. S. Orlov, M. Finn, David J. Lloyd

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal Forming Simulation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFlangeMaterials scienceAlloyAluminiumMetallurgyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="htmlview paragraph">Stretch flange features are commonly found in the corner regions of commercial parts, such as window cutouts, where large strains can induce localization and necking. In this study, laboratory-scale stretch flange forming experiments on AA5182 and AA5754 were conducted to address the formability of these aluminum alloys under undergoing this specific deformation process. Two distinct cracking modes were found in the stretch flange samples. One is radial cracking at the inner edge of flange (cutout edge) while the other is circumferential cracking away from the inner edge at the punch profile radius.</div> <div class="htmlview paragraph">Numerical simulation of the stretch flange forming operations was conducted with an explicit finite element code-LS-DYNA. A coalescence-suppressed Gurson-based material model is used in the finite element model. Void coalescence and final failure in stretch flange is simulated through measured second-phase particle fields with a so-called damage percolation model. The numerical modeling is assessed by comparison to the experimental results.</div>

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicMetal Forming Simulation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207