MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3213784481 · doi:10.1016/j.jmrt.2021.11.049

Lateral friction surfacing: experimental and metallurgical analysis of different aluminum alloy depositions

2021· article· en· W3213784481 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ebrahim Seidi, Scott F. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Materials Research and Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Welding Techniques Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGeneral Motors of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMaterials scienceDeposition (geology)MetallurgySubstrate (aquarium)Scanning electron microscopeAluminiumCoatingAlloyComposite materialOptical microscopeDeformation (meteorology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lateral friction surfacing, a solid-state deposition process, is a novel friction surfacing technique. In this approach, frictional heat and plastic deformation result in deposition of consumable material from the radial surface of a tool onto a substrate. This paper presents a comprehensive assessment of lateral friction surfacing of AA2011, AA6061, and AA7075 aluminum alloys, with particular focus on the impacts of process parameters on the coating properties. The influence of process variables such as tool rotational speeds, normal applied forces, and type of consumable materials was investigated on the process temperature, physical, and metallurgical characteristics of the deposits using optical microscopy, infrared thermography, scanning electron microscopy, and EDS. This study exhibits that the lateral friction surfacing approach enables the deposition of ultra-thin and smooth layers of different aluminum alloys. Furthermore, the temperature generated in this technique was low enough to avoid plasticizing the substrate and intermixing between the consumable material and substrate, which mitigates the thermal impacts on the grain structures and metallurgical characteristics. The lateral friction surfacing performance of the different alloys can be partially explained by their material properties. High input energy provided by high normal forces and tool rotational speeds may result in failure in the deposition process of materials with lower thermal conductivity and melting point, which emphasizes on limitations for the process parameters during the process.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.295

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Materials Research and TechnologySame topicAdvanced Welding Techniques AnalysisFrench-language works237,207