Fatigue behaviour of dissimilar Al 5052 and Mg AZ31 resistance spot welds with Sn‐coated steel interlayer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The fatigue property of dissimilar spot welds between an aluminium alloy (AA5052) and a magnesium alloy (AZ31) was studied in this research. The AA5052 and AZ31 coupons were resistance spot welded together by using an interlayer of Sn‐coated steel between the two coupons. The fatigue test results revealed that the Mg/Al joints had the same level of fatigue strength as Mg/Mg resistance spot welds. It was found that within the life range of Nf < 105 cycles, Mg/Al welds degraded faster than Mg/Mg joints. This was attributed to the larger bending moment on the plane of fatigue failure in the Mg/Al welds. Three failure modes were observed under different cyclic loading regimes: Al/steel interfacial failure, Mg coupon failure and Al coupon failure. Fatigue fracture surface of Mg/Al welds consisted of two distinct regions: crack propagation region with brittle morphology and final rupture with ductile morphology.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".