Mold filling behaviour of LPIM feedstocks using numerical simulations and real-scale injections
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 aims to compare the flow patterns and in-cavity pressures obtained experimentally and numerically for different conditions. Four feedstocks based on 17-4PH stainless steel powder were fully characterised and implemented as material laws in an Autodesk Moldflow package before to obtain numerical simulations that were then validated using real-scale injections. The flow patterns obtained numerically for the different flat bar mold geometries were in good agreement with the experimental flow patterns, showing an almost perfect fit, whereas for the flow patterns of the complex mold geometry, there were some minor discrepancies. The simulated pressure profiles obtained for different mold geometries, feedstock temperatures, mold temperatures and solid loadings were in good agreement with the experimental pressure profiles in terms of trend and pressure values, with maximum relative differences varying from 30 to 64% depending on particular feedstocks and process parameters.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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