Diffusion welding features of the dissimilar 40Cr and W6Mo5Cr4V2 steels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hot rolled 40Cr and W6Mo5Cr4V2 steels were diffusion-welded by using a 4-staged process including uniaxial 50 kN compression at 1200 oC in 10-5 mbar vacuum with following cooling down to room temperature. Structural 40Cr and high-speed tool W6Mo5Cr4V2 steels are dissimilar, since they are different (i) in content of host Fe element and alloying Cr, W, V, Mo elements, (ii) in phase composition (40Cr steel is single-phased and W6Mo5Cr4V2 steel is multi-phased), (iii) in microstructure (homogeneous inclusions-less microstructure is characteristic for 40Cr steel, composite microstructure consisting of matrix Fe-based phase with metal (W, V, Mo) carbides is characteristic of W6Mo5Cr4V2 steel), and (iv) in grain structure (40Cr steel is coarse-grained with grain ~100 µm size and W6Mo5Cr4V2 steel is fine-grained with grain size of several µm). Phase composition, microstructure and grain structure of the steels are retained after welding. Diffusion redistribution of Fe, Cr, W, V, Mo atoms results in forming the diffusion zones with different widths (several µm for W, V and Mo, ~25 for Cr and ~15 µm for Fe). Resulting concentration Cr profiles are typical for diffusion from limited sources and could be satisfactorily described by diffusion coefficient equal to ~1.1∙10-14 m2∙s-1 (the coefficient is weighted over the entire temperature range from 1200 oC to room temperature). Within the diffusion Cr and Fe zones, the Vickers microhardness decreases from ~2000 HV (for W6Mo5Cr4V2 steel) to ~530 HV (for 40Cr steel). During room-temperature tensile tests, the diffusion-welded steels were always fractured not in the diffusion joint but in 40Cr steel.
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) | 0.000 | 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".