The effect of compaction pressure, sintering time, and temperature on the characterization of an aluminum/alumina composite with rising alumina proportions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to investigate the effect of various process parameters such as compaction pressure, sintering temperature, and time on the physio-mechanical properties of a powder metallurgy-fabricated composite made of pure aluminium/alumina. Temperatures (580°C, 600°C, and 630°C), periods (1.5, 2, and 2.5 hr), compacting loads (30KN-65KN), and alumina percentages (2, 4, 6, and 8weight percent) are all considered. X-ray diffraction (XRD) and X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy (XRF) studies are carried out to determine the phases present and their proportions. Crystallite size study is performed using XRD data, and the Al+4 weight % alumina composite has the smallest size of any composite tested. For optimization, sintering density, porosity, and microhardness are calculated. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) is used to analyse the different microstructures. At 600°C, 2 hr of operating time, and 4weight% alumina additions, the highest sintering density and microhardness are found.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".