Effects of compaction technique on processing response of aluminium PM alloys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this research was to assess the effects of compaction method (uni-axial die compaction and cold isostatic pressing) on two aluminium powder metallurgy alloys. Both systems were mixtures of elemental and master alloy powders. Mechanical and physical properties from samples prepared using both methods were compared. Analyses included the measurement of green and sintered densities, tensile properties and microstructural analyses. Results indicated that sintered products of a largely comparable quality could be realised for both alloys regardless of the compaction approach employed. PM2324 displayed sensitivity to compaction pressure such that low values were preferred for cold isostatic pressing (CIP) whereas higher values yielded superior sintered products when die compaction was implemented. Conversely, compaction pressure had no meaningful impact on the sintering behaviour of PM7075 for CIP or die pressed samples.Le but de cette recherche consistait à évaluer les effets de la méthode de compaction (compaction uniaxe en moule et compression isostatique à froid) sur deux alliages d’aluminium de la métallurgie des poudres. Les deux systèmes consistaient en mélanges de poudres élémentaires et de poudres d’alliage mère. On a comparé les propriétés mécaniques et physiques des échantillons préparés en utilisant les deux méthodes. Les analyses incluaient la mesure de la densité à cru et frittée, les propriétés de traction et les analyses de la microstructure. Les résultats indiquaient que l’on pouvait réaliser des produits frittés d’une qualité très comparable pour les deux alliages, peu importe l’approche de compaction utilisée. PM2324 démontrait une sensitivité à la pression de compaction de telle sorte que des valeurs faibles étaient préférées pour le CIP alors que des valeurs plus élevées produisaient des produits frittés supérieurs avec la compaction en moule. Inversement, la pression de compaction n’avait pas d’impact significatif sur le comportement de frittage de PM7075 pour les échantillons pressés par CIP ou en moule.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".