MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2462353262 · doi:10.1002/srin.200606468

Influence of Residual Elements on Mechanical Properties of Two Carbon Steel Grades

2006· article· en· W2462353262 on OpenAlexaff
Su Xu, Jim R. Brown, W. R. Tyson

Bibliographic record

Venuesteel research international · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of Steels
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsCharpy impact testMaterials scienceMicrostructureMetallurgyUltimate tensile strengthToughnessFerrite (magnet)Grain sizeCarbon fibersDuctility (Earth science)Hardening (computing)Carbon steelComposite materialCorrosionCreep

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Experiments were carried out to study the influence of residual elements on microstructure and mechanical properties of two carbon steel grades (i.e. 0.04% C and 0.20% C). The effect of residuals on the microstructure of the carbon steels was mainly to decrease ferrite grain sizes. The effect of residuals on tensile properties was mainly to increase yield and tensile strengths and to slightly decrease ductility, which reflected a combination of solid solution hardening by residuals and grain refinement. The 40 J notch toughness transition temperature (TT) was determined by fitting Charpy absorbed energies to a hyperbolic function and by finding the temperature corresponding to 40 J in the fitted curve; a statistical analysis was performed to ensure the repeatability of TTs defined by this procedure. After the step‐cooling heat treatment to maximize segregation, the 40 J TT of a 0.04% C steel with high Mn and Si contents increased by 28K and the 40 J TT of 0.20 % C steels with the highest residual level (0.085% Sn, 0.4% Cu and 0.4% Ni) increased by 24K, indicating that the upward shift of TT is small even for high levels of residuals. Grain boundary segregation was semi‐quantitatively analysed by Auger electron spectroscopy. Small amounts of Sn segregation were observed, most notably in the low‐C grade.

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)0.001
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.267 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations8
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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