MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972808115 · doi:10.1179/174328407x185938

Weld metal cracking in laser beam welded single crystal nickel base superalloys

2008· article· en· W1972808115 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yiming Wang, O.A. Ojo, Rong-Rong Ding, M.C. Chaturvedi

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials Science and Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceSuperalloyWeldabilityMetallurgyGrain boundaryWeldingCrackingBase metalAlloyFusion weldingComposite materialMicrostructure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The weldability of two single crystal nickel base superalloys CMSX-4 and CMSX-486 were investigated by autogenous bead-on-plate laser beam welding. The analysis of microsegregation that occurred during solidification in the fusion zone indicated that while W and Re segregated into the γ dendrites, γ′ forming elements Ti, Ta, and Al as well as Hf were rejected into the interdendritic liquid. Fusion zone cracking was observed in both the materials and was observed to have initiated and propagated along the high angle stray grain boundaries in the weld metal of the two alloys. Increased formation of stray grains and increased extent of fusion zone cracking were, however, observed in the CMSX-486 alloy. Extension of solidification temperature range mainly by microsegregation of grain boundary strengthening elements B, Hf, and Zr in CMSX-486 was suggested to be responsible for the increased susceptibility of the alloy to stray grain formation and weld metal cracking compared to CMSX-4 superalloy.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations26
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials Science and TechnologySame topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207