MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587768421 · doi:10.4271/2017-01-0285

A Hardness Study on Laser Cladded Surfaces for a Selected Bead Overlap Conditions

2017· article· en· W2587768421 on OpenAlexafffund
Navid Nazemi, Mohammad K. Alam, Jill Urbanic, Syed Saqib, Afsaneh Edrisy

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser and Thermal Forming Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBeadMaterials scienceLaserMetallurgyComposite materialOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laser cladding is used to coat a surface of a metal to enhance the metallurgical properties at the surface level of a substrate. For surface cladding operations, overlapping bead geometry is required. Single bead analyses do not provide a complete representation of essential properties; hence, this research focuses on overlapping conditions. The research scope targets the coaxial laser cladding process specifically for P420 stainless steel clad powder using a fiber optic laser with a 4.3 mm spot size on a low/medium carbon structural steel plate (AISI 1018). Many process parameters influence the bead geometrical shape, and it is assumed that the complex temperature distributions within the process could cause subsequent large variations in hardness values. The bead overlap configurations experiments are performed with 40%, 50% and 60% bead overlaps for a three-pass bead formation. A three-dimensional transient fully coupled thermal-metallurgical-mechanical finite element (FE) model was developed to simulate hardness variations in the laser cladded component. For the simulation, the thermo-physical and thermo-mechanical data of the clad and substrate materials in the range of room temperature to the melting temperature are assigned as an input data for the analysis. The numerical results of the microhardness, melt pool, and heat affected zone (HAZ) are compared with the Vickers microhardness measurements, melt pool, and HAZ geometry. The results will provide relevant information for process planning decisions and will provide a baseline for predicting properties of metal additive manufactured components.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicLaser and Thermal Forming TechniquesFrench-language works237,207