A Review Study on the Main Sources of Porosity in Al‐Si Cast Alloys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study was performed on A356 and B319 alloys in mechanically stirred or degassed condition. Melts were Sr‐modified and grain‐refined. Hydrogen content was varied from less than 0.1 ml/100 g Al to ∼0.4 ml/100 g Al; Fe was increased to 0.8% in B319 alloy. Lanthanum and cerium were added as 99.5% pure metals. Two main techniques were used to investigate porosity formation: fracture surface of tensile or fatigue test bars, or reduced pressure test (RPT) method. Porosity type and shape were examined. The results show that pore size is more influential than small scattered ones from a mechanical point of view. Tensile testing is affected by porosity located at the center of the testing bar, whereas edge porosity is responsible for crack initiation in case of fatigue testing. Intermetallics precipitate in the form of intercepted platelets which restricts the flow of the molten metal, leading to formation of shrinkage cavities. Precipitation of clusters of compounds from the liquid state such as Al2Si2Sr, Mg2Sn, Al3Ti, or added Al2O3particles would as well act as nucleation sites for porosity formation. Most oxides were observed in the form of long branched strings. In some cases, bifilms were also reported in addition to SrO and MgO.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".