Determination of forming limit diagrams of AA6013-T6 aluminum alloy sheet using a time and position dependent localized necking criterion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The forming limit behaviour of AA6013-T6 aluminium alloy sheet was characterized under isothermal conditions at room temperature (RT) and 250°C using limiting dome height (LDH) tests. Full field strain measurements were acquired throughout testing using in situ stereoscopic digital image correlation (DIC) techniques. Limit strain data was generated from the resulting full field strain measurements using two localized necking criteria: ISO12004- 2:2008 and a time and position dependent criterion, termed the "Necking Zone" (NZ) approach in this paper, introduced by Martinez-Donaire et al. (2014). The limit strains resulting from the two localization detection schemes were compared. It was found that the ISO and NZ limit strains at RT are similar on the draw-side of the FLD, while the NZ approach yields a biaxial major limit strain 14.8% greater than the ISO generated major limit strain. At 250°C, the NZ generated major limit strains are 31-34% greater than the ISO generated major limit strains for near uniaxial, plane strain and biaxial loading conditions, respectively. The significant variance in limit strains between the two methodologies at 250°C highlights the need for a validation study regarding warm FLC determination.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".