MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765356229 · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-14713-1

Thermo-mechanical improvement of Inconel 718 using ex situ boron nitride-reinforced composites processed by laser powder bed fusion

2017· article· en· W2765356229 on OpenAlexafffund
Gi-Hun Shin, Byoung-Kee Kim, Kyung Tae Kim, Dong-Yeol Yang, Clodualdo Aranas, Joon‐Phil Choi, Ji‐Hun Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersKorea Institute of Materials ScienceKorea Institute of Machinery and MaterialsMinistry of Science, ICT and Future PlanningMcGill University
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialAlloyInconelComposite numberCompressive strengthBoron nitrideThermal expansion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Hexagonal boron nitride-reinforced Inconel 718 (h-BN/IN718) composites were fabricated using a laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) technique to treat a nanosheet-micropowder precursor mixture prepared in a mechanical blending process. Tailoring the BN in IN718 enhanced the thermal resistance of the composites, thereby dampening the sharpness of the melting temperature peak at 1364 °C. This is because the presence of the BN reinforcement, which has a low coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE), resulted in a heat-blocking effect within the matrix. Following this lead, we found that the BN (2.29 g/cm 3 ) was uniformly distributed and strongly embedded in the IN718 (8.12 g/cm 3 ), with the lowest alloy density value (7.03 g/cm 3 ) being obtained after the addition of 12 vol% BN. Consequently, its specific hardness and compressive strength rose to 41.7 Hv 0.5 · cm 3 /g and 92.4 MPa · cm 3 /g, respectively, compared to the unreinforced IN718 alloy with 38.7 Hv 0.5 · cm 3 /g and 89.4 MPa · cm 3 /g, respectively. Most importantly, we discovered that the wear resistance of the composite improved compared to the unreinforced IN718, indicated by a decrease in the coefficient of friction (COF) from 0.43 to 0.31 at 2400 s. This is because the BN has an exfoliated surface and intrinsically high sliding and lubricating characteristics.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations72
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207