MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409222705 · doi:10.3390/jmmp9040123

Cutting Fluid Effectiveness in the High-Speed Finish Machining of Inconel 718 Using a Whisker-Reinforced Ceramic Tool

2025· article· en· W4409222705 on OpenAlexafffund
Walid Jomaa, Monzer Daoud, Hamid Javadi, Philippe Bocher

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Manufacturing and Materials Processing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieurePolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInconelWhiskerMachiningMaterials scienceCeramicCutting fluidMetallurgySuperalloyComposite materialMechanical engineeringEngineeringAlloy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to investigate the effectiveness of cutting fluid during the high-speed face-turning of superalloy Inconel 718 using chamfered whisker-reinforced ceramic inserts. It addresses this topic by providing a comprehensive understanding of the machinability of Inconel 718 under both dry and wet conditions through analytical friction modeling and a detailed analysis of the chip formation process. Two new indexes, named the Area Function (AF) and the Shape Function (SF), were derived to assess the serration intensity of the chips. Particular attention was paid to the interaction between the cutting speed and the cutting fluid. The results showed that wet conditions promote uniform chip formation, more stable forces, a lower coefficient of friction, and the absence of notch wear. At low cutting speed (60 m/min) and dry machining results in high serration intensity (SF = 0.7) and segmentation frequency (fseg = 22.08 kHz) compared to the SF of 0.4 and fseg = 19.69 kHz in wet conditions. The segmentation frequency increases significantly with cutting speed, reaching 71.03 kHz and 63.32 kHz at a cutting speed of 225 m/min for dry and wet conditions, respectively. It was also found that the rate of increase in the tangential force was lower (20.49 N/s) when using cutting fluid at a high cutting speed (225 m/min) compared to dry conditions (27.37 N/s).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.237 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Manufacturing and Materials ProcessingSame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207