MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2968022015 · doi:10.3390/jmmp3030072

Experimental Investigation of Laser Surface Transformation Hardening of 4340 Steel Spur Gears

2019· article· en· W2968022015 on OpenAlexaff
Al Khader Borki, Abderrazak El Ouafi, Ahmed Chebak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Manufacturing and Materials Processing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHigh Entropy Alloys Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHardening (computing)Materials scienceDesign of experimentsHardened steelResponse surface methodologyLaserLaser power scalingRotational speedIndentation hardnessMetallurgyMechanical engineeringComposite materialOpticsEngineeringMicrostructureMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an experimental investigation of laser surface transformation hardening (LSTH) of 4340 steel spur gears using regression analysis. The experimental work is focused on the effects of various LSTH parameters on the hardness profile shape and the hardened depth variation. The investigations are based on a structured design of experiments and improved statistical analysis tools. The experimentations are carried out on AISI 4340 steel spur gears using a commercial 3 kW Nd:YAG laser system. Laser power, scanning speed, and rotation speed are used as process parameters to evaluate the variation of the hardened depth and to identify the possible relationship between the process parameters and the hardened zone physical and geometrical characteristics. Based on the experimental data and analysis of variance, the direct and interactive contributions of the process parameters on the variation of the hardness profile shape and the hardened depth are analyzed. The main effects and the interaction effects are also evaluated. The results reveal that all the process parameters are relevant. The cumulative contribution of the three parameters in the hardened depth variation represents more than 80% with a clear predominance of laser power. The contribution of the interactions between the parameters represents 12% to 16%. The resulting hardness values are relatively similar for all the experimental tests with about 60 HRC. The evaluation of the produced regression models for hardened depth prediction shows limited performance suggesting that the predictive modeling process can be improved.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Manufacturing and Materials ProcessingSame topicHigh Entropy Alloys StudiesFrench-language works237,207