MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of wear-induced plastic deformation at the trimmed edge of DP980 steel sheets

2018· article· en· W2892819158 on OpenAlexaff
Zeyuan Cui, Sandeep Bhattacharya, D. E. Green, A.T. Alpas

Bibliographic record

VenueIOP Conference Series Materials Science and Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal Forming Simulation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrimmingEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionMaterials scienceDeformation (meteorology)PlasticityMetallurgyDie (integrated circuit)Composite materialEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to increase the use of advanced high strength steel (AHSS) for automotive light-weighting, the significant trimming-induced wear damage that AHSS sheets cause to the trim dies should be reduced so as to decrease die maintenance costs and deterioration of the quality of sheared edge. In this research, the wear characteristics in the upper AISI D2 die inserts used for trimming DP980-type AHSS sheets and the wear-induced plastic deformation at the sheared edges of DP980 were studied. Observation of wear profiles at the edge of the upper trim die revealed that material abrasion was the main damage feature. The trimmed edge quality of DP980 deteriorated with the number of strokes, as indicated by an increase in burr width. Plastic strains near the surface of the sheared edge estimated using the displacements of martensite plates, increased from 2.9 at 2.5 μm below the trimmed edge after 40,000 th cycles, to 55 after 80,000 th cycles. Micro-hardness tests performed to estimate the local flow stresses in the shear affected zone (SAZ) indicated that the flow stress at a distance of 4.5 μm below the trimmed edge increased with the number of trimming cycles to 1.73 GPa in the 80,000 th trimmed part.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIOP Conference Series Materials Science and EngineeringSame topicMetal Forming Simulation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207