In Envelope Additive/Subtractive Manufacturing and Thermal Post-Processing of Inconel 718
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".