MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410841447 · doi:10.1016/j.ijrmhm.2025.107266

Molybdenum 8wt% rhenium alloy processed by laser powder bed fusion: From powder production to mechanical testing at elevated temperatures

2025· article· en· W4410841447 on OpenAlexafffund
Aurore Leclercq, Anna Czech, Thibault Mouret, Marcin Lis, Adriana Wrona, Vladimir Braïlovski

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Refractory Metals and Hard Materials · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersPRIMA QuébecNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRheniumMaterials scienceFusionAlloyMetallurgyMolybdenumLaserOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Molybdenum is highly valued in industry because of its unique properties, especially at high temperatures. Additive manufacturing technologies , particularly laser powder bed fusion (LPBF), are becoming increasingly popular for producing complex shapes at a lower cost as compared to the conventional forming processes. However, printing molybdenum with LPBF presents challenges, especially caused by its hot cracking susceptibility . Several approaches have been explored to address this issue, including alloying molybdenum with other elements, which has proven effective in enhancing the printability and minimizing the occurrence of cracking, particularly with the addition of rhenium . In this study, a combination of mechanical blending of molybdenum powder and a rhenium precursor, followed by the reduction of the precursor and plasma spheroidization, was used to produce spherical 30–55 μm molybdenum‑rhenium (8 wt%) powders with rheological properties suitable for LPBF. Compared to pure molybdenum, the use of the alloyed powder led to an increase in the crack-free printed density, from 97 to 98.5 %, and in the compressive strength , from 240 to 340 MPa, at 600 °C and from 150 to 190 MPa at 1000 °C, at the expense of a ∼ 5 % reduction in the compression strain . To demonstrate the potential of printing complex geometries using the developed powders, complex geometry artifacts containing 0.25 mm-thin letters, wide dense sections and auto-supported 50 %-density 0.7 mm-thin strut diamond lattice structures were successfully printed.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.887

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Refractory Metals and Hard MaterialsSame topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207