MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1723345372 · doi:10.5267/j.ijiec.2015.7.003

Multi-objective optimization of surface roughness, cutting forces, productivity and Power consumption when turning of Inconel 718

2015· article· en· W1723345372 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hamid Tebassi, Mohamed Athmane Yallese, Riad Khettabi, Salim Belhadi, Ikhlas Meddour, François Girardin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIndian National Science Academy
KeywordsInconelSurface roughnessMaterials scienceCarbideSurface finishResponse surface methodologyMechanical engineeringMetallurgyComposite materialEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nickel based super alloys are excellent for several applications and mainly in structural components submitted to high temperatures owing to their high strength to weight ratio, good corrosion resistance and metallurgical stability such as in cases of jet engine and gas turbine components. The current work presents the experimental investigations of the cutting parameters effects (cutting speed, depth of cut and feed rate) on the surface roughness, cutting force components, productivity and power consumption during dry conditions in straight turning using coated carbide tool. The mathematical models for output parameters have been developed using Box-Behnken design with 15 runs and Box-Cox transformation was used for improving normality. The results of the analysis have shown that the surface finish was statistically sensitive to the feed rate and cutting speed with the contribution of 43.58% and 23.85% respectively, while depth of cut had the greatest effect on the evolution of cutting force components with the contribution of 79.87% for feed force, 66.92% for radial force and 66.26% for tangential force. Multi-objective optimization procedure allowed minimizing roughness Ra, cutting forces and power consumption and maximizing material removal rate using desirability approach.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations31
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering ComputationsSame topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207