MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903675396 · doi:10.3390/ma12010012

The Effect of Selective Laser Melting Process Parameters on the Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Al6061 and AlSi10Mg Alloys

2018· article· en· W2903675396 on OpenAlexafffund
Ahmed H. Maamoun, Yi F. Xue, M.A. Elbestawi, Stephen C. Veldhuis

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsSelective laser meltingMicrostructureMaterials scienceProcess (computing)MetallurgyLaserComposite materialComputer scienceOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Additive manufacturing (AM) offers customization of the microstructures and mechanical properties of fabricated components according to the material selected and process parameters applied. Selective laser melting (SLM) is a commonly-used technique for processing high strength aluminum alloys. The selection of SLM process parameters could control the microstructure of parts and their mechanical properties. However, the process parameters limit and defects obtained inside the as-built parts present obstacles to customized part production. This study investigates the influence of SLM process parameters on the quality of as-built Al6061 and AlSi10Mg parts according to the mutual connection between the microstructure characteristics and mechanical properties. The microstructure of both materials was characterized for different parts processed over a wide range of SLM process parameters. The optimized SLM parameters were investigated to eliminate internal microstructure defects. The behavior of the mechanical properties of parts was presented through regression models generated from the design of experiment (DOE) analysis for the results of hardness, ultimate tensile strength, and yield strength. A comparison between the results obtained and those reported in the literature is presented to illustrate the influence of process parameters, build environment, and powder characteristics on the quality of parts produced. The results obtained from this study could help to customize the part's quality by satisfying their design requirements in addition to reducing as-built defects which, in turn, would reduce the amount of the post-processing needed.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations204
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207