Numerical Simulation of Ti/Al Bimetal Composite Fabricated by Explosive Welding
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a 2D numerical model that is more physically realistic was established to simulate the complete process of Ti/Al explosive welding. Basing on the ANSYS/AUTODYN software package, the smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) and arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE) were used for running this simulation. The numerical model can capture the typical physics in the explosive welding process, including the expansion of explosives, flyer plate bending, the impact of metal plates, jetting, and the wavy interface. The variable physical parameters during the explosive welding process were discussed. Most parts of the jet originated from the aluminum plate. According to the model, the jet velocity reached 7402 m/s. The pressure at the detonation point was too small to make the two plates to bond. The pressure could reach an order of magnitude of 107 kPa when the detonation energy tended to be stable and was far more than the yield strength of both materials, which resulted in an obvious narrow region of plastic strain emerging close to the collision zone. The signs of shear stresses between the two plates were the opposite. The interface morphology changed from straight to wave along the propagation of the detonation wave in the simulation, which was consistent with the experimental results.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it