MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805581150 · doi:10.3390/jmmp2020034

Numerical Simulation of Water Quenching of Large Size Steel Forgings: Effects of Macrosegregation and Grain Size on Phase Distribution

2018· article· en· W2805581150 on OpenAlexafffund
Mountadar Lyassami, D. Shahriari, Emna Ben Fredj, Jean-Benoît Morin, Mohammad Jahazi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Manufacturing and Materials Processing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetallurgy and Material Forming
Canadian institutionsCégep de Sorel-TracyÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsIngotMaterials scienceForgingGrain sizeMetallurgyQuenching (fluorescence)Volume fractionAusteniteAlloyContinuous cooling transformationParticle-size distributionMartensiteBainitePhase (matter)Volume (thermodynamics)Composite materialMicrostructureParticle sizeThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, water quenching of large ingots was simulated using FORGE NxT 1.1® Finite Element code. Simulations were carried out for as-forged medium-carbon low-alloy steel. A novel method is proposed to simulate the different parts of a large size forged block with different chemical compositions and grain sizes using the multiple materials method. The effects of macrosegregation, grain size variation and cooling rate on phase distribution through the volume of the forged block were investigated. The delay in transformation kinetics, which is due to the effect of grain size variation and carbon content, was analyzed. Results show that macrosegregation and grain size variations significantly influence transformation start points and the volume fraction of phases that are present in each location of the forged ingot. The proposed prediction method was validated using high-resolution dilatometry experiments and X-ray diffraction measurements to evaluate accurately the volume fraction of martensite, bainite and the percentage of retained austenite for each condition.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations18
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Manufacturing and Materials ProcessingSame topicMetallurgy and Material FormingFrench-language works237,207