MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deep Drawing Parameters and Characteristics for the Hot Forming of AA7075

2018· article· en· W2893145019 on OpenAlexafffund
Kaab Omer, C. Butcher, Shahrzad Esmaeili, Michael J. Worswick

Bibliographic record

VenueIOP Conference Series Materials Science and Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal Forming Simulation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsHonda Development and Manufacturing of America
KeywordsDeep drawingBlankFormabilityHot stampingConstitutive equationStampingDie (integrated circuit)Materials scienceForming processesQuenching (fluorescence)LubricantAluminiumWork (physics)Finite element methodMechanical engineeringStructural engineeringMetallurgyComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hot forming of 7000 series aluminum alloys, or die quenching (DQ), consists of solutionizing the blank in a furnace and subsequently stamping it in a chilled die set. Being a relatively new technology, adopting the DQ process into automotive assembly lines involved several challenges. One of these challenges is the constitutive modelling, which is being addressed in literature. Another challenge is determining the proper formability conditions for DQ to work. To this end, the work presented herein investigated different forming parameters required to successfully deep draw AA7075 discs. Two disc sizes were selected: 177.8 and 203.3 mm. Parameters that were investigated were: binder load and lubricant applied. The deep draw experiments were also modelled in the LS-Dyna finite element code, using the constitutive data and a Barlat-2000 yield surface developed in other work by the authors. The predicted deep draw curves were found to match well the experimental data. The earring profiles also matched well.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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