Effect of Holding Time on the Diffusion Behavior at Interface of Dissimilar Metals Joint between Aluminum and Carbon Steel Joint Using Element Promoter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Holding time is used for optimizing the bond diffusion between aluminum Al and Carbon steel SS400. The objective of this research was to investigate the effects of holding time on the interface reactions of diffusion welding between aluminum and carbon steel. Holding time variations of 10, 15, 30 and 45 minutes were applied at 950°C using mixture of Cu and Fe powder as elements promoter. Single lap joint configuration was performed in vacum furnace to join the dissimilar materials which allowed bonding diffusion. Microstructure was examined on the same test piece. It was found that during diffusion process at 950°C, the interfacial zone between aluminum and carbon steel substrate features intermetallic layers. The intermetallic thickness increased with increasing the holding time. Crack or incomplete bonding appeared on the specimens with holding time up to 30 minutes and didn’t appear on the specimens with holding time of 45 minutes. Cu rich-element promoter made diffusion penetrated deeper than Fe rich-element promoter in the same holding time. Macrostructure, microstructure and SEM examinations revealed that Al-steel joint had the best result with element promoter content of 60/40 % at 45 minutes holding time. There was no interlayer gap at this specimen. Additionally, from mapping view it can be suggested that in terms of poor interface bonding, Cu molecules were located just around the interface area, on the other hand, in case of strong interface bonding, Cu molecules are scattered throughout the specimen. In fact, the position of Cu molecules can be used as a promising marker for the detection of quality of diffusion joint.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".