MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213157316 · doi:10.18280/acsm.440409

Fabrication of AA7075 Hybrid Green Metal Matrix Composites by Friction Stir Processing Technique

2020· article· en· W4213157316 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sanjay Kumar, Ashish Kumar Srivastava, Rakesh Kumar Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnales de Chimie Science des Matériaux · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAluminum Alloys Composites Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFriction stir processingMaterials scienceComposite materialComposite numberDeformation (meteorology)FabricationSevere plastic deformationMicrostructure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Friction stir processing is an avant-garde technique of producing new surface composite or changing the different properties of a material through intense, solid-state localized material plastic deformation. This change in properties depends upon the deformation formed by inserting a non-consumable revolving tool into the workpiece and travels laterally through the workpiece. This research work highlights the effect of process parameters on mechanical properties of fabricated surface composites by friction stir processing. By using various reinforcing materials like Ti, SiC, B4C, Al2O3 with waste elements like waste eggshells, rice husks, coconut shell and coir will be used to fabricate the green composites which are environmentally friendly and reduces the problem of decomposition. The parameter for this experiment is considered as the reinforcing materials, tool rotation speed and tool tilt angle. The SiC/Al2O3/Ti along with eggshell are selected asreinforcement materials. The main effect of the reinforcement is to improve mechanical properties, like hardness, impact strength and strength. The results revealed that the process parameters significantly affect the mechanical properties of friction stir processed surface composites.

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 score0.244
Threshold uncertainty score0.761

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations21
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnales de Chimie Science des MatériauxSame topicAluminum Alloys Composites PropertiesFrench-language works237,207