MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966171579 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2019-0087

Die stress analysis and improvement of the welding valve fastener in multi-stage forging

2019· article· en· W2966171579 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gow Yi Tzou, Shih‐Hsien Lin, Dyi‐Cheng Chen, Un-Chin Chai

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetallurgy and Material Forming
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForgingFastenerCylinder stressStress (linguistics)Die (integrated circuit)Structural engineeringCore (optical fiber)Materials scienceWeldingUltimate tensile strengthResidual stressFinite element methodEngineeringComposite materialMetallurgyMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the multi-stage cold forming die of a welding valve fastener using simulation software. It is possible to understand the various stress intensities of the die core bore and the corresponding distributions during each forging stage so as to improve the service life of the die. These stresses include radial stress, axial stress, hoop stress, and maximum principal stress, as well as the different types of stresses that could cause different fractures of the die core. Therefore, it is necessary to use different die design methods to improve the fracture issues for different die cores. For example, shrink fit can be used between the die core and die case. By adjusting the size of the shrink fit, tensile hoop stress can be converted into compressive hoop stress, which can avoid the generation of axial cracking of the die during the forging formation. In addition, drastic changes in axial stress caused by the stress concentration on the die core can yield a transverse crack of the die core. Thus adopting preventative measures by split such a stress concentration into two sections reduces the drastic changes in axial stress on that section.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicMetallurgy and Material FormingFrench-language works237,207