Microstructure homogenization of laser powder bed fusion support-free low angle IN718 walls through heat treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• Heat treatment homogenizes the microstructure of support-free IN718 walls. • Heat treatment yields similar microhardness of 482 HV (bulk) and 478 HV (downskin). • Precipitation hardening resolves the mismatch in hardness between bulk and downskin. This study investigates the effectiveness of heat treatment (HT) to homogenize the microstructural and mechanical asymmetry between the bulk and the downskin regions of support-free IN718 walls fabricated at angles of 30°, 20°, 15°, and 10° In the as-built condition, the microhardness ranged from 340 ± 5 HV to 351 ± 4 HV for the bulk and from 315 ± 4 HV to 323 ± 10 HV for the downskin region, resulting in a maximum difference range of 35 HV. The HT eliminated this difference where microhardness values of 482 ± 3 HV in the bulk and 478 ± 4 HV in the downskin were measured. The HT induced γ″ precipitation with volume fraction and mean precipitate size in the bulk of 16.6 % and 24.7 ± 7.3 nm. These values are statistically comparable to those in the downskin: 15.8 % and 26.5 ± 7.9 nm. The similarity in the γ″ characteristics explains the recovery of the mismatch in hardness as γ″ contributes approximately 85 % of the strengthening in the HT condition.
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) | 0.001 | 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".