MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W564255383 · doi:10.1520/stp158420140058

Determination of Fracture Behavior of AA6060 Aluminum Alloy Extrusion Using Digital Image Correlation3© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Natural Resources, 2015.

2015· book-chapter· en· W564255383 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jidong Kang, Kevin Gong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetallurgy and Material Forming
Canadian institutionsHamilton Regional Laboratory Medicine Program
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueen (butterfly)MajestyAlloyMetallurgyPolitical scienceMaterials scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dependence of fracture strain on stress triaxiality has been recently recognized as an important factor that controls the fracture of aluminum alloys. A number of experimental programs have been reported to determine fracture strains in a wide range of stress triaxiality using a variety of types of specimens. However, because of the lack of direct measurement of local strains near the fracture zone, indirect estimations of fracture strain are commonly used. The errors in determining fracture strain are uncertain. In this study we use the digital image correlation (DIC) method to determine the fracture strains in AA6060 aluminum extrusion material. This material is often used in automotive crash management systems. A commercially available DIC system was used to follow the deformation occurring during the tests of a set of newly designed specimens with a wide range of stress triaxiality; thus, the inception of instability and fracture can be captured and distinguished precisely. More importantly, post-experiment analysis in DIC allows strain calculations at macroscopic levels at varying step sizes, thus, the dependence of fracture strain on gauge length has been determined in each testing condition. The fracture locus of AA6060 aluminum extrusion has been successfully determined and the concept of “scaled fracture strain” has then been proposed to ensure consistency of the fracture locus in both the experiment and in modeling.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMetallurgy and Material FormingFrench-language works237,207