Temperature- and Time-Dependent Mechanical Behavior of Post-Treated IN625 Alloy Processed by Laser Powder Bed Fusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The microstructure and mechanical properties of IN625 alloy processed by laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) and then subjected to stress relief annealing, high temperature solution treatment, and hot isostatic pressing were studied. Tensile testing to failure was carried out in the 25–871 °C temperature range. Creep testing was conducted at 760 °C under 0.5–0.9 yield stress conditions. The results of the present study provided valuable insights into the static and creep properties of LPBF IN625 alloy, as compared to a wrought annealed alloy of similar composition. It was shown that at temperatures below 538 °C, the mechanical resistance and elongation to failure of the LPBF alloy were similar to those of its wrought counterpart, whereas at higher temperatures, the elongation to failure of the LPBF alloy became significantly lower than that of the wrought alloy. The solution-treated LPBF alloy exhibited significantly improved creep properties at 760 °C as compared to the wrought annealed alloy, especially under intermediate and low levels of stress.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".