Microstructure and properties of Al-4.8Cu-0.45Mn-0.19Cd-0.18Ti-0.17Zr-0.14V aluminum alloy extrusion bar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mechanical properties, texture transformation, and mechanism of Al–Cu–Mn alloy during annealing were studied using three-dimensional orientation distribution function (ODF), electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD), and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). The results showed that the increase in yield strength after annealing at 200 °C is due to the decrease in the proportion of P and M textures and the increase in the proportion of Goss texture. The increase in the change rate of mechanical properties observed during annealing at 250 and 350 °C can be attributed to the higher proportion of M and P textures and the reduced proportion of Goss textures. Among them, the proportion of M texture increased significantly, and the Goss texture decreased significantly after annealing at 350 °C. This is because the structural energy density (Ev) value of the Goss texture is higher than that of the M texture at 250 °C and 350 °C. The Goss texture is in an unstable state of high energy order. The deformed Goss texture is unstable at high temperatures, leading to conversion into M and other textures. The EBSD and TEM analysis revealed that the hardness is mainly related to the change in dislocation density. When the annealing temperature is increased from 250 to 350 °C, the hardness is significantly reduced from 62 HV to 52 HV, and the dislocation density is reduced from 4.0 × 10 14 ρ/m −2 to 2.4 × 10 14 ρ/m −2 .
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".