MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403607531 · doi:10.3390/ma17205051

Enhanced Durability of Wood Cutting Tools through Thermal Cycling

2024· article· en· W4403607531 on OpenAlexafffund
Hamza Sofiane Meddas, Muftah Zorgani, Majid Heidari, Mousa Javidani, Tom Levasseur, Mohammad Jahazi

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMetal Alloys Wear and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiDK-SPEC (Canada)École de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDurabilityTemperature cyclingCyclingMaterials scienceComposite materialThermalForensic engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the impact of multi-step austenitization heat treatment on the in-service life of modified AISI A8 cold work tool steel knives used in wood cutting. The knives were subjected to two treatment methods: single quenching and double tempering (SQDT) and double quenching and double tempering (DQDT). Both treatments were followed by physical vapor deposition (PVD) coating to enhance surface properties. The DQDT treatment resulted in a finer microstructure and more uniform carbide distribution. Field tests on 24 knives over 124 h demonstrated up to 130% improvement in wear resistance for DQDT knives, along with superior edge stability and better PVD coating preservation. DQDT knives exhibited ductile fractures characterized by dimples, contrasting with the brittle fracture and cleavage facets in SQDT knives. Residual stress measurements showed higher compressive stresses in DQDT knives (-280 MPa) compared to SQDT knives (-30 MPa), which increased further after field testing. The enhanced performance of DQDT knives is attributed to their refined microstructure, improved carbide distribution, and higher compressive residual stresses, offering significant potential for improving wood cutting tool efficiency and durability.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicMetal Alloys Wear and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207