MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A 3D discrete-element model for simulating liquid feeding during dendritic solidification of steel

2019· article· en· W2947087518 on OpenAlexaff
Yi Feng, Miha Založnik, Brian G. Thomas, A.B. Phillion

Bibliographic record

VenueIOP Conference Series Materials Science and Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSolidification and crystal growth phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDendrite (mathematics)MechanicsMaterials scienceRepresentative elementary volumeFlow (mathematics)Fluid dynamicsEquiaxed crystalsFinite element methodHagen–Poiseuille equationDiscrete element methodThermodynamicsPhysicsGeometryMathematicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A 3D meso-scale discrete-element model has been developed to simulate fluid flow during dendritic solidification of steel. The model domain is a representative volume element consisting of a set of equiaxed dendritic grain envelopes along with extra-dendritic liquid channels, where the final grain shape is given by a Voronoi tessellation. Solidification of each grain is simulated via a volume average approach. The output of the solidification simulation at a given solid fraction is used as the input mesh for the fluid flow simulation. A single domain Darcy-Brinkman model is used to calculate the pressure field within the liquid channels, with Poiseuille flow assumed to occur in the extra-dendritic region, and Darcy flow assumed to occur within the dendrite envelope. Mass conservation over each element is then used to derive a flow equation that is solved via the finite element method. The results of this new model are first compared with a previously-developed granular model [1] where fluid flow only occurs between the grains, and then compared with different forms of the Carman-Kozeny equation. It is shown that the intra-dendritic liquid fluid flow plays a major role in the semi-solid pressure field, and thus needs to be included when investigating hot tearing susceptibility in engineering alloys undergoing dendritic solidification.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.246
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 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIOP Conference Series Materials Science and EngineeringSame topicSolidification and crystal growth phenomenaFrench-language works237,207