MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410562280 · doi:10.1002/mawe.202400358

Influence of Galfan coating on tensile properties, microstructure and dislocation densities of CRS 1018 steel

2025· article· en· W4410562280 on OpenAlexaff
A. Hu, Xin Wei, Wutian Shen, Henry Hu, Xueyuan Nie

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterialwissenschaft und Werkstofftechnik · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal and Thin Film Mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrostructureMaterials scienceCoatingUltimate tensile strengthDislocationComposite materialMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the present work, zinc‐6 % aluminium alloy, Galfan, is coated through the hot dipping technique on tensile bars made from cold rolled CRS 1018 steel to study the influence of Galfan coating on tensile properties of mild steel. The tensile results indicate that Galfan coating prepared by the hot dipping process reduces the ultimate tensile strength and yield strength of the substrate, whereas the elongation at failure is significantly increased. The microstructure of the as‐rolled, hot‐dipping coated, and other comparing specimens is observed by optical microscopy. Nano indentation is used to evaluate the variation of dislocation densities in the tested specimens. The analyses of the hardness‐depth curves obtained from the nano indentation testing implies that the dislocation density of the coated steel might be lower than that of the uncoated specimen. The thermal energy received by the steel substrate during the heating stage of the hot‐dipping process should be responsible for the recovery of the substrate, which leads to the reduction in dislocation densities and the arrangement of the dislocations into lower‐energy configurations. As a result, the Galfan coating increases the elongation at failure considerably with a moderate decrease in strengths.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.748

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialwissenschaft und WerkstofftechnikSame topicMetal and Thin Film MechanicsFrench-language works237,207