Microstructure and high temperature tensile properties of wide gap brazed cobalt based superalloy X-40
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wide gap brazing (WGB) of X-40 cobalt based superalloy was conducted in this study using BNi-9 braze alloy with X-40 and IN738 additive alloys. A groove was machined into X-40 bars with a nominal width of 6·35 mm before filler application. Following brazing at 1200°C for 15 min, the microstructure of the as brazed joints was examined using SEM, EDS and nanoindentation technique. Both WGB joints with X-40 and IN783 additive alloys contained primary matrix phase in addition to a number of boron containing phases which assumed either eutectic or discrete forms. Nanoindention testing revealed that these boron containing phases exhibited hardness values several times higher than the base alloy and matrix phase contributing to the embrittlement of the braze joint. Porosity was also observed in both types of WGB braze joints, the degree of which was greatest in the braze joints with IN738 additive alloy. Tensile testing at 950°C showed that the yield strength of both WGB joints was higher than that of the baseline specimens while the ultimate tensile strength of the WGB joints was lower than that of the baseline X-40. The ductility of the WGB joints was significantly inferior to that of the baseline X-40, particularly for WGB with IN 738 additive alloy.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it