MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885534505 · doi:10.3390/jmmp2030050

Towards Sustainable Machining of Inconel 718 Using Nano-Fluid Minimum Quantity Lubrication

2018· article· en· W2885534505 on OpenAlexafffund
Hussien Hegab, Hossam A. Kishawy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Manufacturing and Materials Processing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMachinabilityInconelMachiningMaterials scienceLubricationTool wearMetallurgyMechanical engineeringComposite materialAlloyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Difficult-to-cut materials have been widely employed in many engineering applications, including automotive and aeronautical designs because of their effective properties. However, other characteristics; for example, high hardness and low thermal conductivity has negatively affected the induced surface quality and tool life, and consequently the overall machinability of such materials. Inconel 718, is widely used in many industries including aerospace; however, the high temperature generated during machining is negatively affecting its machinability. Flood cooling is a commonly used remedy to improve machinability problems; however, government regulation has called for further alternatives to reduce the environmental and health impacts of flood cooling. This work aimed to investigate the influence of dispersed multi-wall carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) and aluminum oxide (Al2O3) gamma nanoparticles, on enhancing the minimum quantity lubrication (MQL) technique cooling and lubrication capabilities during turning of Inconel 718. Machining tests were conducted, the generated surfaces were examined, and the energy consumption data were recorded. The study was conducted under different design variables including cutting speed, percentage of added nano-additives (wt.%), and feed velocity. The study revealed that the nano-fluids usage, generally improved the machining performance when cutting Inconel 718. In addition, it was shown that the nanotubes additives provided better improvements than Al2O3 nanoparticles.

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 score0.002

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 head0.256
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations91
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Manufacturing and Materials ProcessingSame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207