MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211106507 · doi:10.1016/j.jmrt.2021.10.120

A thermal-stress modelling methodology in ABAQUS for fundamentally describing the die/casting interface behaviour in a cyclic permanent die casting process

2021· article· en· W3211106507 on OpenAlexaff
Chunying Wei, Jun Ou, Farzaneh Farhang Mehr, Daan M. Maijer, Steve Cockcroft, Xu Wang, A Lateng, Zhi Chen, Zhihua Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Materials Research and Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAluminum Alloy Microstructure Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDie (integrated circuit)Die castingMaterials scienceMetallurgyCastingStress (linguistics)Process (computing)Interface (matter)Mechanical engineeringComposite materialEngineeringComputer scienceNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This manuscript describes a novel method for thermal-stress modelling of a cyclic, permanent die casting process in the commercial software package ABAQUS. The key element in this method is that it updates the casting's geometry according to the deformed die at elevated temperature before filling the die cavity . Using this method, the evolution of gap and/or pressure at the die/casting interface has been predicted. This in turn has allowed for a more fundamental and less empirical description of the evolution in resistance to heat transfer at the interface during a casting cycle. The new methodology has been compared to a previously published methodology, and the comparison shows a noticeable difference between the two approaches in predicting the temperature field in the die and the casting and prediction of areas prone to shrinkage-based porosity. This methodology also predicts the stress distribution in the die in the cyclic steady-state operation, which may be of value in predicting die fatigue life .

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.485

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.200
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.162 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Materials Research and TechnologySame topicAluminum Alloy Microstructure PropertiesFrench-language works237,207