Influence of Homogenization and Solution Treatments Time on the Microstructure and Hardness of Inconel 718 Fabricated by Laser Powder Bed Fusion Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present study, Inconel 718 (IN718) superalloy fabricated by laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) has been characterized focusing on the effect of both homogenization and solution treatment time on grains structure, crystallographic texture, precipitates formation/dissolution and material hardness. For this purpose, a heat-treatment time window with a wide range of soaking times for both treatments was established aiming to develop the optimal post-treatment conditions for laser powder bed fused IN718. It was found that the as-printed IN718 is characterized by very fine columnar/cellular dendrites with Laves phase precipitating at the grain boundaries as well as inter-dendritic regions, which differs from the microstructure of wrought and cast materials and requires special heat-treatment conditions different from the standard treatments. The results reveal that the relatively short homogenization treatment at 1080 °C for 1 h was not enough to significantly change the as-printed grain structure and completely dissolve the segregates and Laves phase. However, a completely recrystallized IN718 material and more Laves phase dissolution were obtained after homogenization treatment for 4 h. A further increase in time of the homogenization treatment (7 h) resulted in grain growth and coarsening of carbides precipitates. The solution treatment time at 980 °C did not cause noticeable changes in the crystallographic texture and grain structure. Nevertheless, the amount of δ-phase precipitation was significantly affected by the solution treatment time. After applying the heat-treatment time window, the hardness increased by 51%-72% of the as-printed condition depending on the treatment time due to the formation of γ' and γ″ in the γ-matrix. The highest material hardness was obtained after 1 h homogenization, whereas the prolonged time treatments reduced the hardness. This study provides a comprehensive investigation of the post heat-treatments of the laser powder bed fused IN718 that can result in an optimized microstructure and mechanical behavior for particular applications.
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) | 0.001 | 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".