MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408145338 · doi:10.1177/09544062251321757

Comparative analysis of the high-temperature tensile properties of laser-welded AA5052 and AA6061 for automotive applications

2025· article· en· W4408145338 on OpenAlexaff
Pedram Farhadipour, Narges Omidi, Noureddine Barka, Mohamad Idriss, François Nadeau, Abderrazak El Ouafi

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAluminum Alloy Microstructure Properties
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomotive industryWeldingUltimate tensile strengthMaterials scienceLaserMetallurgyComposite materialEngineeringOpticsAerospace engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the high-temperature tensile properties of laser-welded AA5052-H36 and AA6061-T6 aluminum alloys, utilizing experimental and statistical analysis. Tensile tests were conducted at temperatures ranging from 25°C to 300°C at corresponding strain rates of 0.01 and 0.1 s −1 . The results indicate that AA5052-H36 exhibits superior mechanical strength compared to AA6061-T6, with a near-linear decrease in ultimate tensile strength, showing a reduction of approximately 60% from 273 MPa at 100°C to 108 MPa at 300°C. AA5052-H36 also shows consistent increases in fracture strain across the tested conditions, with fracture strain rising from 0.14 at 100°C to 0.37 at 300°C. In contrast, AA6061-T6 displays a non-linear decline in UTS, dropping by 51%, from 220 MPa at 100°C to 110 MPa at 300°C, and an increase in fracture strain from 0.05 at 100°C to 0.07 at 300°C. This non-linear behavior is linked to the dissolution of <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>β</mml:mi> <mml:mo>″</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> phases and the subsequent precipitation of <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>β</mml:mi> <mml:mo>′</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> phases, as revealed by the differential scanning calorimetry curve. Statistical analysis confirms that temperature is the dominant factor influencing tensile performance, with notable contributions from phase transformations observed in the DSC curve. Energy absorption analysis highlights the advantages of AA5052-H36, which absorbs considerably more energy before failure compared to AA6061-T6, due to its greater plastic deformation capacity. AA5052-H36 absorbs up to 13.3 J at 250°C, while AA6061-T6 absorbs a maximum of 3.3 J at the same temperature. Both alloys show maximum energy absorption at 250°C, with increasing temperature leading to a rise in absorbed energy up to 13.3 J. However, beyond 250°C, the energy absorption decreases substantially. In conclusion, while AA5052-H36 may offer superior performance in high-temperature tensile loading compared to AA6061-T6, the choice of alloy for applications above 250°C should be made with careful consideration of the trade-offs, including strength, corrosion resistance, and manufacturability, to prevent possible creep-related failures.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.568

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.207 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C Journal of Mechanical Engineering ScienceSame topicAluminum Alloy Microstructure PropertiesFrench-language works237,207