Processing and Characterization of In Situ (TiC–TiB<sub>2</sub>)<sub>p</sub>/AZ91D Magnesium Matrix Composites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, a practical and cost‐effective processing route, in situ reactive infiltration technique, was utilized to fabricate magnesium matrix composites reinforced with a network of TiC–TiB 2 particulates. These ceramic reinforcement phases were synthesized in situ from Ti and B 4 C powders without any addition of a third metal powder such as Al. The molten Mg alloy infiltrates the preform of (Ti p + B 4 C p ) by capillary forces. The microstructure of the composites was investigated using scanning electron microscope (SEM)/energy dispersive X‐ray spectroscopy (EDS). The compression behavior of the composites processed at different conditions was investigated. Also, the flexural strength behavior was assessed through the four‐point‐bending test at room temperature. Microstructural characterization of the (TiB 2 –TiC)/AZ91D composite processed at 900 °C for 1.5 h shows a relatively uniform distribution of TiB 2 and TiC particulates in the matrix material resulting in the highest compressive strength and Young's modulus. Compared with those of the unreinforced AZ91D Mg alloy, the elastic modulus, flexural and compressive strengths of the composite are greatly improved. In contrast, the ductility is lower than that of the unreinforced AZ91D Mg alloy. However, this lower ductility was improved by the addition of MgH 2 powder in the preform. Secondary scanning electron microscopy was used to investigate the fracture surfaces after the flexural strength test. The composites show signs of mixed fracture; cleavage regions and some dimpling. In addition, microcracks observed in the matrix show that the failure might have initiated in the matrix rather than from the reinforcing particulates.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".