The influence of tool geometry on mechanical properties of friction stir welded AA-2024 and AA-2198 joints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The tool geometry in friction stir welding (FSW) is a critical parameter to produce reliable and consistent joints, especially when it comes to joining dissimilar alloys with different mechanical and thermal properties. The aim of the present work is to investigate the effect of FSW tool design on the mechanical characteristic of as-welded AA2198(T3)-AA2024(T3) joints. Three shoulder profiles (flat, spiral, and fan) and five different pin profiles (tapered cylindrical, straight cylindrical, threaded cylindrical, cone and square) were tested. A visual inspection and metallographic characterization were conducted to evaluate the sound state of the joint. Tensile tests and scanning electron microscopy combined with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy were used to assess the mechanical properties of the different joints in regard to fractographic analyses and local chemical composition. Significant flash was produced for flat shoulder configurations. FSW tools with fan or with spiral shoulders prevent the formation of the flash defect. Lack of penetration (LOP) and kissing bond defects were avoided by tapering the tip of the pin with a diameter greater than or equal to the plate thickness. The tapered cylindrical pin with a fan shoulder was the optimal tool design configuration for mechanical properties.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".