MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of powder properties on mesoscale thermal FEM simulations of powder bed additive manufacturing

2023· article· en· W4377019228 on OpenAlexaff
Meet Upadhyay, Chad W. Sinclair, Daan M. Maijer

Bibliographic record

VenueIOP Conference Series Materials Science and Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceMetal powderThermal conductivityVolume (thermodynamics)Composite materialConsolidation (business)Finite element methodThermalMetallurgyMetalThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Numerous studies have used FEM simulations to assess the effects of the heat source parameters on the melt pool volume during metal powder bed additive manufacturing. However, considerable debate still exists on how to incorporate the evolution of the thermophysical properties used to describe the powder as it undergoes heating, melting, consolidation and finally solidification. For single layer studies, since powder volume is much smaller compared to the substrate volume, highly detailed, computationally expensive powder property descriptions may not provide a commensurate increase in accuracy of simulation results. This study aims to quantify the effect of powder properties on the melt pool volume created during electron beam melting of Ti6Al4V powder using predictions from a FEM-based heat conduction model. The dependence of thermal conductivity, specific heat, and density of the powder on temperature and beam power density will be studied. Additionally, the relevance of the powder properties with changing layer height and beam power and speed will also be quantified.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIOP Conference Series Materials Science and EngineeringSame topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207