MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389540771 · doi:10.17118/11143/21154

Multiscale numerical modeling and experimental validation of additivelymanufactured alumina ceramics

2023· article· en· W4389540771 on OpenAlexaff
Zahra Zaiemyekeh, Haoyang Li, Dan L. Romanyk, James D. Hogan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceCeramicNumerical modelsComputer scienceComposite materialComputer simulationSimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Additively manufactured ceramics (AMC) have gained popularity due to their flexibility in the design and fabrication of industrial complex geometries with multi-functionalities when compared with traditionally fabricated ceramics. In this study, we investigate the behavior of alumina ceramics additively manufactured using stereolithography (SL) through multi-scale computational and experimental mechanics approaches. The SL method is based on the deposition of consecutive layers of a photoreactive material, where the laser energy and exposure time of each layer was set to be 30 mW/cm2, and 10 s, respectively. All specimens were sintered at 1650C for 2 hours after debinding. The material microstructure was characterized using EBSD, SEM, and TEM to provide inputs for multiscale modeling. The AMCs with two different printing orientations (POs) were tested under dynamic strain rates by using a split-Hopkinson Pressure Bar setup coupled with ultra-high-speed imaging and digital image correlation analysis. Next, 3D polycrystalline RVEs were generated using Neper software, and these were informed by the experimentally measured grain size distribution and porosity. To model the transgranular fracture, a viscosity regularized plasticity Johnson-Holmquist model (i.e., JH2-V model) was implemented by using a VUMAT subroutine in the Abaqus. The intergranular fracture mode was accounted for by implementing a cohesive zone model at the grain boundaries. The micromechanical model was quantitatively (i.e., stress-strain histories) and qualitatively (i.e., intergranular, and transgranular failure mechanisms) validated by experimental data. Our experimental data showed the strength of the present AMCs is lower than that of the conventionally made ceramics by ~ 40% and ~ 25% under quasi-static and dynamic rates, respectively. It was also revealed that the failure pattern in the AMCs is affected by the POs. The present microstructure-informed model provided a better understanding of the initiation/competition of failure mechanisms of the AMCs that are challenging to unravel through purely experimental approaches. Altogether, the present multiscale modeling framework allows for correlating the microstructural characteristics of the AMCs, and interface properties to the macroscale response of the material (e.g., strength) to provide microstructure-propertyperformance relationships, and this has implications for designing future weight-optimized additively manufactured ceramicbased structures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207