MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186428532 · doi:10.32393/csme.2021.61

Laser Additive Manufacturing Of High Reflectivity Aluminium Alloys

2021· article· en· W3186428532 on OpenAlex
Sagar Patel, Haoxiu Chen, Yu Zou, Mihaela Vlasea, Kevin Slattery, John Barnes

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress in Canadian Mechanical Engineering. Volume 4 · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAluminiumMaterials scienceReflectivityMetallurgyLaserOptoelectronicsOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As metal additive manufacturing (AM) technologies are increasingly adopted for end-use products, the bank of materials manufactured by this technology are bound to grow at a rapid rate. AM is often deployed as it enables the ability to manufacture components with high geometric complexity and has the potential to reduce cost and lead times. Ultimately, there is a potential to locally tailor material properties from the microscale to the macroscale using this approach. The AM of each material comes with its own set of challengesthe most common issues being porosity and residual stresses due to the localized thermal loads, particularly for the laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) AM technology, which currently has the highest industrial uptake. The issue of porosity in particularly critical for the automotive, aerospace, and defense industries wherein aluminium (Al) alloys are commonly used. Aluminium alloys commonly contain highly volatile elements, which when interacting with the low beam spot sizes (<100 m) of most common LPBF systems are very easily vaporized, leading to multiple issues such as porosity and cracks in the final printed part. In this work, a combination of physics-driven LPBF processing diagrams, beam path planning, and advanced material characterization equipment including X-ray computed tomography and surface profilometry are used to understand the effect of laser power, scan speed, and beam spot radius on the porosity of two aluminium alloys -AlSi10Mg and Scalmalloy , with reported densities >99.98%. Additionally, the influence of the LPBF processing parameters on microstructure of these alloys and thereby on the surface roughness and mechanical properties such as hardness and tensile strength is highlighted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it