In Envelope Additive/Subtractive Manufacturing and Thermal Post-Processing of Inconel 718
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the application of an in envelope additive/subtractive (LPBF) manufacturing method (Matsuura LUMEX-Avance-25) to fabricate IN718 benchmarking coupons. The coupons were then examined comprehensively for surface finish both with and without high-speed micro-machining. The microstructure of the manufactured IN718 coupons was investigated thoroughly in the as-fabricated condition and following three different standard and one non-standard post-processing heat treatments. As built coupons revealed columnar grain morphology mainly along the <100> direction with a cellular dendritic sub-grain structure and without any strengthening precipitates. Grain size, aspect ratio, and texture were maintained after each of the applied four heat treatments. Only one of the standard heat treatments resulted in the δ phase formation. The other three heat treatments effectively dissolved the Laves phase preventing the δ formation while promoting the formation of γ′/γ″ precipitates. Despite the observed differences in their microstructures, all of the heat treatments resulted in similar yield and ultimate tensile strength values that ranged between 1103−1205 MPa and 1347−1387 MPa, respectively. These values are above the minimum requirements of 1034 MPa and 1241 MPa for the wrought material. The non-standard heat treatment provided the highest elongation of 24.0 ± 0.1% amongst all the heat-treated specimens without a significant loss in strength, while the standard heat treatment for the wrought parts resulted in the lowest elongation of 18.3 ± 0.7% due to the presence of δ phase.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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 it