Transient liquid phase (TLP) brazing of Mg–AZ31 and Ti–6Al–4V using Ni and Cu sandwich foils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transient liquid phase (TLP) brazing of Mg–AZ31 alloy and Ti–6Al–4V alloy was performed using double Ni and Cu sandwich foils. Two configurations were tested; first, Mg–AZ31/Cu–Ni/Ti–6Al–4V and second, Mg–AZ31/Ni–Cu/Ti–6Al–4V. The effect of set-up configuration of the foils on microstructural developments, mechanical properties and mechanism of joint formation was examined. The results showed that different reaction layers formed inside the joint region depending on the configuration chosen. The formation of ϵ phase (Mg), ρ (CuMg 2 ), δ (Mg 2 Ni) and Mg 3 AlNi 2 was observed in both configurations. Maximum shear strength obtained was 57 MPa for Mg–AZ31/Ni–Cu/Ti–6Al–4V configuration and in both configurations, the increase in bonding time resulted in a decrease in joint strength to 13 MPa. The mechanism of joint formation includes three stages; solid state diffusion, dissolution and widening of the joint, and isothermal solidification.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".