Friction stir welding/processing of metals and alloys: A comprehensive review on microstructural evolution
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The unique combination of very large strains, high temperatures and high strain rates inherent to friction stir welding (FSW) and friction stir processing (FSP) and their dependency on the processing parameters provides an opportunity to tailor the microstructure, and hence the performance of welds and surfaces to an extent not possible with fusion processes. While a great deal of attention has previously been focused on the FSW parameters and their effect on weld quality and joint performance, here the focus is on developing a comprehensive understanding of the fundamentals of the microstructural evolution during FSW/P. Through a consideration of the mechanisms underlying the development of grain structures and textures, phases, phase transformations and precipitation, microstructural control across a very wide range of similar and dissimilar material joints is examined. In particular, when considering the joining of dissimilar metals and alloys, special attention is focused on the control and dispersion of deleterious intermetallic compounds. Similarly, we consider how FSP can be used to locally refine the microstructure as well as provide an opportunity to form metal matrix composites (MMCs) for near surface reinforcement. Finally, the current gaps in our knowledge are considered in the context of the future outlook for FSW/P.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it