Investigation of argon shielding gas on mechanical performances of butt welded AISI 304L plates using oscillating laser beam
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a study on the effect of argon (Ar) gas to the square-pattern oscillating laser welding process. The welding process has been conducted under different pressure of Ar ranges 20, 30, 40 and 50 Psi. Also, this study provides a comparative analysis of the effect of the other welding parameters including welding power, welding speed and welding frequency. After the experimental investigation, a statistical analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to validate the experimental observations. This analysis also provides a more robust relationship between the welding parameters and quantifies the effect of each parameter. A regression model is proposed to accurately predict the ultimate tensile strength (σUTS) within the given range of input parameters. The results showed that the use of Ar shielding gas, compared to welding without shielding, significantly improved the mechanical properties and microstructure of the welded AISI 304L. But the maximum ultimate tensile strength (UTS) achieved was 579.986 MPa at 20 Psi Ar pressure, while the lowest was 439.515 MPa at 50 Psi. Microhardness in the fusion zone also increased with higher Ar pressure, peaking near the weld bead. The shielded welding condition improved the UTS by approximately 1.88% compared to the unshielded process.
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.
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 it