MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310060937 · doi:10.1016/j.pmatsci.2022.101051

Heat treatment for metal additive manufacturing

2022· article· en· W4310060937 on OpenAlex

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 Materials Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersAustralian Research CouncilDepartment of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources, Australian GovernmentDeakin University
KeywordsMaterials scienceMicrostructureResidual stressMetallurgySuperalloyCorrosion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metal additive manufacturing (AM) refers to any process of making 3D metal parts layer-upon-layer via the interaction between a heating source and feeding material from a digital design model. The rapid heating and cooling attributes inherent to such an AM process result in heterogeneous microstructures and the accumulation of internal stresses. Post-processing heat treatment is often needed to modify the microstructure and/or alleviate residual stresses to achieve properties comparable or superior to those of the conventionally manufactured (CM) counterparts. However, the optimal heat treatment conditions remain to be defined for the majority of AM alloys and are becoming another topical issue of AM research due to its industrial importance. Existing heat treatment standards for CM metals and alloys are not specifically designed for AM parts and may differ in many cases depending on the initial microstructures and desired properties for specific applications. The purpose of this paper is to critically review current knowledge and discuss the influence of post-AM heat treatment on microstructure, mechanical properties, and corrosion behavior of the major categories of AM metals including steel, Ni-based superalloys, Al alloys, Ti alloys, and high entropy alloys. This review clarifies significant differences between heat treating AM metals and their CM counterparts. The major sources of differences include microstructural heterogeneity, internal defects, and residual stresses. Understanding the influence of such differences will benefit industry by achieving AM metals with consistent and superior balanced performance compared to as-built AM and CM metals.

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 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 score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.883

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.246 · 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