MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Phase-field modeling of austenitic steels used in turbines

2023· article· en· W4377019048 on OpenAlexaff
Salvador Valtierra Rodriguez, Michael Greenwood, Delin Li, Jean-Benoît Lévesque, Vladimir Timoshevskii, Daniel Paquet, Nikolas Provatas

Bibliographic record

VenueIOP Conference Series Materials Science and Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSolidification and crystal growth phenomena
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecNatural Resources CanadaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrostructureAusteniteMaterials scienceCastingMetallurgyPhase (matter)ThermalAustenitic stainless steelTurbinePhase field modelsMechanicsThermodynamicsMechanical engineeringEngineeringCorrosionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The performance in hydro-electric turbine casting and repair requires understanding of how process parameters and chemistry selection affect solidification microstructures. The aim of this study is to provide a quantitative phase-field formulation for process-microstructure relationships that seeks to model stainless steels. We have developed a phase-field model to simulate austenitic stainless steel solidification under experimental thermal histories. To this end we look at a pseudo-binary approximations for numerical efficiency. The pseudo-binary formulation is underpinned by the alloying element equivalent value, a metallurgical tool used to analyze the microstructural impact of “minor” alloying elements in stainless steels. For model validation we develop thin wall casting experiments to measure the thermal history and chemistry controlled microstructure. The models incorporate a thermodynamic parameterization and are linked to a thermal-phase transformation model which represents the experimentally measured thermal history. The results display a good agreement with the primary branch spacing and cellular to dendritic transition of the casting experiments. These models and software provide the basis for future expansion to include more complex microstructures.

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)0.001
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIOP Conference Series Materials Science and EngineeringSame topicSolidification and crystal growth phenomenaFrench-language works237,207