Thermo-microstructural-mechanical modeling on effect of travel speeds on thin Ti–6Al–4V deposits developed by laser wire deposition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study established a platform of three mechanistic models to understand the predictability of yield strength (YS) for Ti–6Al–4V deposits developed by laser wire deposition (LWD). Eight single-bead, multi-layer Ti–6Al–4V deposits were fabricated by LWD with four travel speeds for subsequent characterization and validation. A finite element analysis (FEA) thermal model was developed to simulate the deposition process and predict the thermal history. A microstructural model based on the α / β phase transformation kinetics was used to predict α / β phase fractions and α lath widths. The constitutive equations integrating the major strengthening mechanisms were used to predict the YS. The accuracy of all models was confirmed by comparison with experimental data. Grain size and tensile strength are statistically different only between the deposits produced with the slowest and fastest travel speeds. Microhardness is statistically similar across all travel speeds. Tensile results for all deposits are above the minimum tensile requirements according to the AMS4999 standard.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".