Characterization and Microstructural Evolution of WC-Co Cemented Carbides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two types of cemented carbides have been elaborated from three mixtures of WC and Co powders containing 3, 5 and 6% of cobalt mass. Three samples of these mixtures have been obtained by liquid phase sintering and three others of the same composition have been sintered then densified by hot isostatic pressing (HIP). Observations by scanning electronic microscope have allowed to note that the samples elaborated by sintering followed by an HIP densification have a more homogeneous structure than that observed in the sintered samples. Under the compression, the WC grains flattens and interlock more easily from one another which gives a uniform surface appearance. Energy dispersion analysis shows that these samples contain a very small voluminal fraction of graphite and residual porosities, these are more pronounced in sintered samples, especially in the case of alloys with a low Co content (3 and 5%). X rays diffraction analysis allowed to show clearly the existence of cobalt type carbide in the sintered samples. Measurement of the closed porosity allows to observe that the sintering process followed by densification by HIP leads to the elaboration of alloys with a low rate of closed porosity. Microhardness of these samples have improved hardnesses.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".