MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319318416 · doi:10.1115/pvp2015-45994

A Macro-Micro Model of Fusion Zone Microstructure Evolution in Mn-C Low-Alloy Steel Coupled With Thermal Stress Analysis

2015· article· en· W2319318416 on OpenAlexaff
Komeil Kazemi, A. Artemev, Jianguo Zhou, John Goldak

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of Steels
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceMicrostructureAusteniteFerrite (magnet)Eutectic systemAlloyWeldingMetallurgyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A macro-micro-model for microstructure evolution in the fusion zone of a l.2 Mn and 0.11 C low-alloy steel is described. The macro-model is a 3D transient thermal analysis of a welded structure that resolves the weld pool with element size greater than 1 mm and time steps greater than 1 second. The micro-model has cell size of about 1 micron and time step size of about 10 micro-seconds with a grid of about 80×80×500 cells. The micro model is positioned on the liquid-solid interface of the weld pool in the macro-model. The boundary conditions for the micro-model are mapped from the macro-model. The micro-model solves the 3D transient solute diffusion equations for Mn and C. The micro-model computes the liquid-solid interface movement with local velocities determined by local temperature, compositions of solid and liquid phases and interface curvature to predict columnar or dendritic solidification structures. As the solid cools from the melting point to room temperature, the evolution of austenite, ferrite, pearlite, bainite and martensite phases are computed. The 3D transient stress due to temperature and phase changes is computed in the micro-model as it cools from the melting temperature to room temperature. At room temperature a micro-model tensile test is run to 4% strain. The macro-stress and strain is compared to the micro-stress and strain distributions. The model is intended to be used to initialize models of fracture, fatigue and creep in weld fusion zones.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of SteelsFrench-language works237,207