MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399803342 · doi:10.5267/j.esm.2024.5.004

A brief review on industrial remanufacturing of structural and functional components: Wire-Arc Additive Manufacturing Technique

2024· review· en· W4399803342 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Japheth Obiko, Talent Kachomba, James Mutua, Joshua Ngoret, Samson Olaitan Jeje, Mxolisi Brendon Shongwe, Nicholus Malatji

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Solid Mechanics · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemanufacturingArc (geometry)Materials scienceMechanical engineeringEngineering drawingManufacturing engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many industries rely heavily on the availability and reliability of complex structural and functional components to execute operations efficiently. However, failure of components during service occurs due to exposure to unfavourable operating conditions, causing wear and tear of these components. The damage will result in costly downtime and potential safety hazards. Repairing, remanufacturing and refurbishing these complex parts is critical. Restoring broken structures into operation ensures the smooth operation of the industry, thus preventing losses. Conventionally, repairing parts poses a challenge. However, Wire-arc additive manufacturing (WAAM), which employs the welding principle, has revolutionised component repairing or remanufacturing. This paper reviews the literature on manufacturing complex parts, repair, remanufacture and refurbishment of broken structural and functional parts using WAAM technology. This paper also highlights the various strategies and techniques currently used to improve the quality of WAAM 3D printed parts. The study further covers the immense potential of WAAM in revolutionising the remanufacturing and repair of components. The review study has provided a roadmap for future research and development to take full advantage of this new cutting-edge manufacturing technology.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngineering Solid MechanicsSame topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207