Comprehensive pore defect analysis for electron beam-powder bed fusion of Ti48Al2Cr2Nb
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The process-microstructure relationship of gamma-titanium aluminide (Ti-48Al-2Cr-2Nb) parts fabricated via electron beam-powder bed fusion (PBF-EB) process was investigated. A set of 107 records of process parameter combinations were deployed to analyze and classify relative density, lack-of-fusion (LoF) and Gas porosity defects. The bulk density ranges spanned 88 %–99.99 %, with Gas porosity spanning 0.01 %–0.30 %, and lack-of-fusion defects spanning 0.001 %–12 %. Based on literature pertaining to defects addressable via hot isostatic pressing, four classes of density performance were identified: excellent (>99.8 %), good (99.6–99.8 %), poor (98.0–99.6 %), and failed (<98.0 %). For the purpose of this study, a high density outcome (excellent class) is identified to be ideal in terms of expected mechanical properties, specifically strength, fatigue, and ductility. Pore properties were mapped against different energy representations, for example, volumetric energy density (VED) and normalized enthalpy (NE). The results showed the importance of utilizing NE to visualize data and identify zones in the process parameter space where best performance is expected. A region of NE > 15 is expected to have an excellent performance, whereas NE < 10 is expected to result in unacceptable porosity outcomes.
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".