Influence of Thermal Aging Parameters on the Characteristics of Aluminum Semi-Solid Alloys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study aimed at analyzing the response of semisolid A357 aluminum alloys to unconventional thermal treatment cycles of T4/T6/T7 conditions. The mechanical, electrical, and microstructural characterizations of such semisolid alloys were investigated. The microstructure evolutions of Fe-intermetallic phases and strengthening precipitates were characterized using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM), respectively. The mechanical failure of such semi solid A357 aluminum alloys, used for suspension automotive parts, is mostly related to cracking issues which start from the surface due to hardness problems and propagate due to severe load variations. For these reasons, the multiple thermal aging cycles, in this study, are applied to enhance the mechanical properties and to have compromised values compared to those obtained by standard thermal treatments. The results obtained in this work indicate that the heat treatment of this alloy can be optimized. The results showed that the optimum characteristics of A357 semisolid alloys were obtained by applying thermal under-aging cycle, interrupted thermal aging cycles and a T7/T6 two steps aging treatment condition. The electrical conductivity and electron microscopy were applied in this study to analyze the characteristics of hardening phases formed due to different aging cycles applied to the alloys investigated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".