Investigating the process parameter window for laser powder bed fusion of copper chrome zirconium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Copper-based alloy UNS C18150 has become an attractive material for laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) processing. However, the complexity of LPBF mandates that unique process parameters be devised for each alloy as these are highly sensitive to material chemistry. This work aims to clarify the general boundaries of the process window for the most influential parameters alongside an exploration into the effects of scan strategy on the density. A series of statistical design of experiments were utilised to model density as a response and predict process parameters that would result in minimised residual porosity. Using optimised parameters, specimen with up to 99.1% of theoretical density were produced, and a window of process parameters was established that yielded similarly dense products. Post-build aging of the LPBF parts was also explored. Here, direct aging of the as-built product at 390°C for 100 h resulted in a peak hardness of 83.3 ± 0.6 HRB.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".