MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888781183 · doi:10.1115/gt2018-75119

Assessing the Feasibility of Micro-Plasma Technology for Additive Manufacturing

2018· article· en· W2888781183 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Nagy, Xiao Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 6: Ceramics; Controls, Diagnostics, and Instrumentation; Education; Manufacturing Materials and Metallurgy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrostructureMaterials sciencePlasmaComposite materialDeposition (geology)SuperalloyIndentation hardnessTransverse planeUltimate tensile strengthWeldingMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this research, a micro-plasma system was investigated for its capability in additive manufacturing (AM). Micro-plasma AM system has the advantage of lower cost and higher deposition rate over laser based AM systems, and generates leaner and cleaner weld deposit than other arc based AM systems. However, the micro-plasma system is complex and involves a large number of process variables. In this study, the feasibility of using a micro-plasma system for additive manufacturing was assessed based on surface features, mechanical properties and microstructure. In addition, two arc and wire feed modes were examined to understand the effects of these two variables. Each was used to produce IN 718 superalloy samples for macro- and microstructure evaluation, hardness, wear, and tensile tests along both long and transverse directions. Preliminary results showed that crack free samples, measured up to 100 mm × 40 mm, can be generated without measurable distortion. Some surface discoloration was observed, ranging from light straw to a purple tint. After heat treatment, the hardness of the samples varies from 403 to 440 HV, with the transverse surface showing slightly lower hardness values. Pin-on-disk wear test yielded consistent wear volume for three sets of the samples produced using different process parameters; however, samples produced with no modifications to the current and wire feed mode showed marginally higher wear rate. Microstructural analysis with SEM and EDS revealed presence of small pinholes, measured from submicron up to 22 μm in diameter, and no indication of any cracks or boundary layers between passes. SEM analysis revealed the presence of high contrast Nb/Mo rich carbides along with γ″-Ni3Nb in the γ matrix. Finally, tensile test was carried out to understand the anisotropic behavior; the results showed that transverse direction had lower tensile strength and ductility. Samples produced with pulsed current and wire feed mode had lower yield/tensile strength but higher ductility than that without current and wire feed mode modification.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 6: Ceramics; Controls, Diagnostics, and Instrumentation; Education; Manufacturing Materials and MetallurgySame topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207