Effect of forming parameters on the corrosion performance of retrogression- and warm-formed AA7075 alloy sheets
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Retrogression forming (RF) and warm forming (WF) are used to remedy formability limitations of high-strength precipitation-hardened AA7075 alloy sheets. RF is a thermomechanical treatment combining retrogression heat treatment and the forming of initially peak-aged T6 temper. WF is a thermomechanical treatment of initially pre-aged temper. The present work examines the corrosion performance of retrogression- and warm-formed AA7075 alloy sheets by determining the optimal pre-aging temperature (80°C or 100°C), forming temperature (room temperature, 150–200°C), strain rate (1, 0.1, or 0.01 s−1), and heating rate (1.1 or 20°C·s−1) for conventional slow and novel fast-forming technologies. Several alternating- and direct-current electrochemical tests were administered, including electrochemical impedance spectroscopy, potentiodynamic polarization, and linear polarization resistance. Results showed that the corrosion performance (i.e., passive film and corrosion-resistant properties) of formed AA7075 sheets was directly proportional to pre-aging and WF temperatures, inversely proportional to the RF temperature, and mildly affected by strain/forming rate and heating rate during forming.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it