MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W565314435 · doi:10.1520/stp10900s

Twenty-One Year Results for Metallic-Coated Steel Sheet in the ASTM 1976 Atmospheric Corrosion Tests

2002· book-chapter· en· W565314435 on OpenAlexaff
HE Townsend, H. H. Lawson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMaterial Selection and Properties
Canadian institutionsLawson Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetallurgyMaterials scienceCorrosionSheet metalComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1976, the ASTM G01.04 Subcommittee on Atmospheric Corrosion initiated a long-term atmospheric corrosion test program at five outdoor locations: Kure Beach, NC (25-meter East-coast marine), Newark-Kearney, NJ (industrial), State College, PA (rural), Point Reyes, CA (West-coast marine), and Fort Sherman, Panama (tropical marine). Among the forty-one materials exposed were four coated steel sheet products: G60 galvanized, G90 galvanized, 55% aluminum-zinc-coated, and Type 2 aluminum-coated. Results are presented for the performance of the coated sheet steels after 21 years. These results indicate the following qualitative order of corrosivity for five sites: Panama ~ Kure Beach > Newark-Kearny > State College > Point Reyes Based on changes in the corrosion of 55% aluminum-zinc-coated, an increase in the aggressiveness at Panama took place sometime during the 10th to 21st year of exposure. Future testing at these sites could be better quantified by short-term (1–2 years) exposures of standard materials. A loss of significant data from 2-, 5- and 10-year removals and initial weights for many of the test materials highlights the importance of safeguards to ensure the integrity of future long-term ASTM tests. In terms of relative performance, the results are consistent with the following order of corrosion resistance (most-to-least). T2 100 ~ AZ55 > G90 > G60

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.243
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMaterial Selection and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207