MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412462828 · doi:10.1016/j.addlet.2025.100301

A new approach to laser DED as a repair technology with laser mesh deposition

2025· article· en· W4412462828 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Girerd, Andres Gameros, Marco Simonelli, Andy Norton, Adam T. Clare

Bibliographic record

VenueAdditive Manufacturing Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of NottinghamRolls-Royce
KeywordsLaserMaterials scienceDeposition (geology)Computer scienceOpticsGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Controlling the heat input and exploring alternate feedstocks for DED is necessary to improve the versatility of DED as a repair technique. In this research, a new DED method using metallic mesh feedstocks and laser beam oscillations. This method is shown to have good stability, repeatability and good bonding with the substrate comparable to other DED processes. The best depositions show a dilution above 40% and a height of more than 1.2 mm. The deposits show similar results to wire DED and powder DED with low dilution levels producing dense clads with no large pores and some grain refinements at the edges of the tracks. This then manifests as a potentially viable repair process with the advantage of a more flexible material input facilitating the delivering of the feedstock material for hard to access repair operations. Furthermore, this process has shown its capability to be used with various energy profiles and mesh density paving the way for a better control of the microstructure for complex repair operations. This new DED alternative method has shown its capability to run efficiently with various scan strategies and feedstocks. Hence, laser mesh deposition could be used to deposit material on inhomogeneous surfaces by using carefully designed scanning strategies and mesh density during the process increasing the repair capabilities of DED.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.191 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdditive Manufacturing LettersSame topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207