MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386883332 · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-43053-6

Study on the forming characteristics of polytetrafluoroethylene/copper jet with different preparation processes

2023· article· en· W4386883332 on OpenAlex
Jianya Yi, Ruijie Hao, Xuezhi Tang, Siman Guan, Zhijun Wang, Jianping Yin

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicHigh-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior
Canadian institutionsMD Precision (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceExtrusionSinteringComposite materialJet (fluid)Composite numberMolding (decorative)Die (integrated circuit)Shaped chargePressingForming processesMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, PTFE/Cu composite material for liner is taken as the research object, and the preparation process and jet forming characteristics of PTFE/Cu composite liner are studied. The liners were prepared by extrusion molding, molded sintering and hot-pressing sintering. Due to different preparation processes, different microstructures of the liner can occur, including defects such as pores and microcracks, resulting in different strength and density of the liner, leading to differences in the forming characteristics of the jet. Therefore, the forming process of the jet was simulated by the finite element numerical simulation software. It was found that there was obvious radial expansion effect in the head of the jet, but with the increase of density, the radial expansion effect was weakened, and the jet velocity decreased gradually. The strength and densification of the shaped charge liner prepared by different processes were different. The densification of the molded sintering liner was generally better than that of the other two kinds of shaped charge liners. As a result, the velocity of the jet formed by the molded sintering liner is always the highest, with a numerical simulation velocity of 6642 m/s and an experimental velocity of 6534.7 m/s. The second is the jet of the hot-pressing sintering liner and the lowest velocity is the jet of the extrusion molding cover, with a numerical simulation velocity of 6482 m/s, while the experimental velocity is only 6397.9 m/s. The jet velocity measured by the pulse X-ray experiment was compared with the velocity of the numerical simulation, and the error was within 2.96%, which verifies the accuracy of the numerical simulation.

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.

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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.367

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.264 · 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