MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Induction Hardening of a 0.40 % C Novel Microalloyed Steel: Effects of Heating Rate on the Prior Austenite Grain Size

2018· article· en· W2906558576 on OpenAlexaff
Vahid Javaheri, Nasseh Khodaei, Tun Tun Nyo, David Porter

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials science forum · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of Steels
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeEuropean Commission
KeywordsMaterials scienceMetallurgyAusteniteGrain sizeMartensiteNiobiumMicroalloyed steelElectron backscatter diffractionMicrostructureInduction hardening

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work explores the effect of heating rate on the prior austenite grain size and hardness of a thermomechanically processed novel niobium-microalloyed 0.40 % carbon low-alloyed steel intended for use in induction hardened slurry pipelines. The aim was to identify the heating rates that lead to the maximum hardness, for high wear resistance, and minimum prior austenite grain size, for high toughness. For this purpose, a Gleeble 3800 machine has been employed to simulate the induction hardening process and provide dilatometric phase transformation data. The prior austenite grain structure has been reconstructed from the EBSD results using a MatlabR script supplemented with MTEX texture and crystallography analyses. Heating rates ranged from 1 to 50 °C/s and the cooling rate was 50 °C/s. The results show that the prior austenite grain size greatly depended on the heating rate: compared to the lower heating rates, the maximum heating rate of 50 C/s produces remarkably fine prior austenite grains and a fine final martensitic microstructure after quenching. In addition, a relation between the heating rate and the deviation from equilibrium temperature has been established.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials science forumSame topicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of SteelsFrench-language works237,207