MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001457560 · doi:10.1088/0022-3727/39/12/022

Prediction of melt pool depth and dilution in laser powder deposition

2006· article· en· W2001457560 on OpenAlexaff
Alireza Fathi, Ehsan Toyserkani, Amir Khajepour, Mohammad Durali

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics D Applied Physics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDilutionDeposition (geology)LaserMineralogyMaterials scienceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)OpticsGeologyChemistryEnvironmental chemistryThermodynamicsGeomorphologyPhysicsSediment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a mathematical model of laser powder deposition (LPD) to predict temperature field, melt pool depth and dilution. The model validated by experiments is developed using the moving heat source method. In this method, the temperature distribution inside the clad and the substrate is obtained using the superposition principle and the solution of the heat diffusion due to a point heat source. The model, which can be used in real-time applications, predicts the melt pool depth and dilution as a function of clad height and clad width, which in practice can be measured by a vision system. Numerical and experimental analyses show a non-linear behaviour of the melt pool depth as a function of process speed. This indicates that the melt pool depth has a maximum at a certain process speed. The comparisons between the numerical and experimental results show that this model is capable of predicting the characteristics of the LPD process accurately. Using the model, some general curves that show the behaviours of the melt pool depth and dilution as a function of clad height, scanning speed and laser power are illustrated.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations159
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics D Applied PhysicsSame topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207