MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2589115599 · doi:10.4271/2017-01-1706

Wear of D2 Tool Steel Dies during Trimming DP980-type Advanced High Strength Steel (AHSS) for Automotive Parts

2017· article· en· W2589115599 on OpenAlexaff
Sandeep Bhattacharya, Daniel J. Green, Raj Sohmshetty, A.T. Alpas

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMetal Alloys Wear and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersFord Motor Company
KeywordsTrimmingAutomotive industryEngineeringHigh strength steelManufacturing engineeringAutomotive engineeringMechanical engineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">Automobile body panels made from advanced high strength steel (AHSS) provide high strength-to-mass ratio and thus AHSS are important for automotive light-weighting strategy. However, in order to increase their use, the significant wear damage that AHSS sheets cause to the trim dies should be reduced. The wear of dies has undesirable consequences including deterioration of trimmed parts' edges. In this research, die wear measurement techniques that consisted of white-light optical interferometry methods supported by large depth-of-field optical microscopy were developed. 1.4 mm-thick DP980-type AHSS sheets were trimmed using dies made from AISI D2 steel. A clearance of 10% of the thickness of the sheets was maintained between the upper and lower dies. The wear of the upper and lower dies was evaluated and material abrasion and chipping were identified as the main damage features at the trim edges. This paper quantifies the wear on the upper and lower dies between 20,000 - 230,000 trimming cycles and notes the observed differences between the wear characteristics in the upper and lower dies.</div></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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.879
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicMetal Alloys Wear and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207