MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2752653631

Dissimilar joining of Carbon/Carbon composites to Ti6Al4V and copper by reactive resistance spot welding

2017· dissertation· en· W2752653631 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ali Akbar Shokati

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Welding Techniques Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSpot weldingCopperMaterials scienceCarbon fibersComposite materialWeldingReinforced carbon–carbonMetallurgyComposite number
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to develop an innovative and user-friendly method for dissimilar joining of the carbon/carbon (C/C) composites to Ti6Al4V and copper through reactive resistance spot welding to form the hybrid structures. The C/C composites used in this study were a 2D C/C composite with high porosity (low strength) and a 3D C/C composite with low porosity content (high strength). It was found that the infiltration of Ti into the C/C composite and formation of a continuous thin TiC layer at the interface of the joints are the dominant mechanisms of the joining. The 2D C/C composite with the flat surface was successfully joined to Ti6Al4V due to the infiltration of the melted Ti6Al4V into the porosity of the 2D C/C composite. On the other hand, it was required to drill the rectangular grooves on the surface of the 3D C/C composite to facilitate the infiltration of the melted Ti into the 3D C/C composite and consequently obtain high strength joints. The strength of 2D C/C composite-Ti6Al4V joints was 7 MPa due to failure of the joints within the low strength 2D C/C composite. By contrast, the maximum strength of the joints using the groove-patterned high-strength 3D C/C composite was 46.14 ± 3.92 MPa. In the case of joining between the 2D C/C composite and copper, the Ti thin sheet and Ti powder interlayers were used. Regarding the joints with the Ti sheet interlayer, some defects and cracks were formed at the interface of the joints, which decreased the strength of the joints, whereas in the case of using the Ti powder interlayer, defect-free joints were obtained.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicAdvanced Welding Techniques AnalysisFrench-language works237,207