Intermetallic Compounds in Al‐SUS316L Composites
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aluminum (Al)‐stainless steel 316L (SUS316L) composites are successfully manufactured by spark plasma sintering (SPS) using pure Al and SUS316L powders as the raw materials. The Al‐SUS316L composite powder is prepared from a 1:1 mixture by volume of Al and SUS316L by mechanical ball milling. This composite powder is subjected to SPS at four different temperatures (500, 550, 600, and 630 °C) at a pressure of 200 MPa and held at the desired temperature for 5 min. Intermetallic compounds such as AlFe 3 and Al 13 Fe 4 , which are detected based on their X‐ray diffraction (XRD) patterns, are created in the Al‐SUS316L composites during SPS. In addition, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy dispersive X‐ray spectroscopy (EDS), field emission‐electron probe microanalysis (FE‐EPMA), and thermogravimetric and differential thermal analysis (TG‐DTA) also confirm the formation of intermetallic compounds. Moreover, the authors conduct a detailed analysis of the intermetallic compounds using transmission electron microscopy (TEM). The intermetallic compounds are well dispersed in Al‐SUS316L composites and the layer of these becomes thicker as the sintering temperature increases to 630 °C. Moreover, the intermetallic compounds can help to make a strong chemical bonding between Al and SUS316L matrix. Consequently, the Al‐SUS316L composites manufactured by the SPS process can be applied in engineering industries such as the automobile, aerospace, and construction industries as high‐strength and lightweight materials.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 it