MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203305622 · doi:10.4271/05-15-01-0005

Effects of Heat Input on Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Dissimilar Laser-Welded Dual-Phase and Boron Steel Joints

2021· article· en· W3203305622 on OpenAlexaff
Isiaka Aderibigbe, A.P.I. Popoola, Rotimi Emmanuel Sadiku, E. Biro

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE International Journal of Materials and Manufacturing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWelding Techniques and Residual Stresses
Canadian institutionsIntelligent Mechatronic Systems (Canada)University of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrostructureMaterials scienceWeldingDual-phase steelBoronComposite materialDual (grammatical number)Phase (matter)MetallurgyLaserMartensiteChemistryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div>Heat-affected zone (HAZ) softening occurs during the laser welding of many Advanced High-Strength Steels (AHSS) that are used for body-in-white (BIW) of automobiles, leading to degradation in the mechanical properties of the welded joints. The microstructure and mechanical properties of dissimilar laser-welded AHSS comprising of as-received 22MnB5 with dual-phase (DP) steels (DP600, DP800, and DP 1000) were investigated in this study. Welds were made at welding speeds ranging from 1 m/min to 3 m/min. Irrespective of welding speed, the DP600-22MnB5 joints fractured in the base metal (BM) of 22MnB5 during tensile tests. Likewise, welded joints of DP800-22MnB5 and DP1000-22MnB5 made at 1 m/min and 2 m/min failed in the BM; however, at 3 m/min the failure location of these joints shifted to the fusion zone (FZ). The fractured surfaces of all the welded combinations were characterized by optical and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Based on fracture energy, joints welded at 2 m/min were optimal due to a compromise of minimizing the weld size and formation of hard phases within the weld FZ and HAZ.</div>

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE International Journal of Materials and ManufacturingSame topicWelding Techniques and Residual StressesFrench-language works237,207