Reducing Yield Asymmetry between Tension and Compression by Fabricating ZK60/WE43 Bimetal Composites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study ZK60/WE43 bimetal composite rods were manufactured by a special method of hot diffusion and co-extrusion. Interface microstructure, deformation mechanism, and yield asymmetry between tension and compression for the composite rods were systematically investigated. It was observed that the salient deformation mechanism of the ZK60 constituent was {10-12}<-1011> extension twinning in compression and prismatic slip in tension, and different deformation modes resulted in yield asymmetry between tension and compression. In contrast, the WE43 constituent tends to be more isotropic due to grain refinement, texture weakening, solid-solution and precipitation strengthening, which were deformed via basal slip, prismatic slip, and {10-12}<-1011> extension twinning in both tension and compression. Surprisingly, it was found that yield asymmetry between tension and compression for the ZK60/WE43 composite rods along the extrusion direction was effectively reduced with a compression-to-tension ratio of ~0.9. The strongly bonded interface acting as a stress transfer medium for the ZK60 sleeve and WE43 core exhibited the coordinated deformation behavior. This finding provides an effective method to decrease the yield asymmetry between tension and compression in the extruded magnesium alloys.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".