Powder metallurgy processing of Al–Cu–Mg alloy with low Cu/Mg ratio
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this work was to develop an Al–Cu–Mg alloy with a low Cu/Mg ratio suitable for press and sinter powder metallurgy (PM) processing. A bulk composition of Al–2·3Cu–1·6Mg was explored for this purpose. Data revealed that the alloy exhibited a normal response to uni-axial die compaction with a performance that was aligned with commercial blends. Temperature and tin content were found to influence the sintering response. Once optimised, near-full theoretical density was achieved in the sintered product. The alloy was also responsive to T6 heat treatment. Peak hardness was attained by solutionising at 530°C and then aging at 200°C for 20 h. Tensile data revealed that the alloy exhibited a very well balanced combination of properties in the T1 and T6 tempers. In this sense, relatively high values of yield strength and ultimate tensile strength were accompanied by wrought-like stiffness and levels of tensile ductility that were abnormally high for press and sinter aluminium PM alloys.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".