MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2917940814 · doi:10.1115/1.4042904

Development and Validation of a Thermometallurgical Model for Furnace-Based Austenitization During Hot Stamping

2019· article· en· W2917940814 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohit S. Verma, H. Yan, J. R. Culham, Massimo Di Ciano, Kyle J. Daun

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Heat Transfer · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of Steels
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAusteniteMetallurgyMaterials scienceMartensiteMuffle furnaceQuenching (fluorescence)Microstructure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In hot-forming die-quenching (HFDQ) boron manganese steel blanks are heated within a roller hearth furnace, and then simultaneously quenched and formed into fully martensitic body-in-white components. Industry needs models that can predict the instantaneous temperature and austenite phase fraction within the roller furnace to diagnose problems (e.g., incomplete austenitization), forecast costs, and optimize process settings. This paper introduces a thermometallurgical model for Al–Si coated 22MnB5, consisting of a coupled heat transfer and austenitization submodels. Two candidate austenitization submodels are considered: an empirical first-order model and a model based on the detailed austenitization kinetics. In the case of the first-order model, a detailed Monte Carlo procedure is used to construct 95% credibility intervals for the blank temperature and austenite phase fraction that accounts for uncertainties in the furnace temperature and model parameters. The models are first assessed using temperature and austenite phase fractions from Al–Si coated 22MnB5 coupons heated in a laboratory-scale muffle furnace, and then used to simulate austenitization of patched blanks within an industrial roller hearth furnace. The results show that the empirical first-order model provides a more robust estimate of austenite phase fraction compared to the detailed model.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.244
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Heat TransferSame topicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of SteelsFrench-language works237,207