A review of past and present developments of the horizontal single belt casting (HSBC) process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Horizontal single belt casting (HSBC) has proven to be a viable future alternative to traditional casting processes (e.g. direct chill and conventional continuous casting for aluminum and steel, respectively). The present paper summarizes HSBC developments in Canada since the 1980s. Theoretical and experimental work is summarized to provide the necessary processing parameters needed to cast a wide range of alloys at pilot and industrial scales. Compared to conventional casting technologies, it is anticipated that HSBC will be a far more versatile, economical, and environmentally friendly method that will also reduce carbon dioxide emissions from metallurgical industries. The effects of air gap dimensions and belt speeds on the stability of the “back meniscus” were also studied for a double-impingement metal feeding system to cast AA2024 aluminum alloy. Using ANSYS Fluent 19.1 computational fluid dynamics software, various combinations of these process parameters were tested to obtain optimum results for promoting back-meniscus stability and assess the effects of these parameters on other phenomena (e.g. air entrainment).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".