Support-free fabrication of IN625 low-angle overhang structures using laser powder bed fusion (LPBF)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Support-free IN625 overhang bars (60 × 10 × 7 mm 3 ) were successfully fabricated using laser powder bed fusion (LPBF), achieving a minimum overhang angle of 5° at 30 µm layer thickness and 10° at 60 µm layer thickness. Supported bars were also fabricated to conduct a systematic comparison. Residual stress analysis revealed an increase in residual stresses with decreasing overhang angles. The downskin surface topography exhibited pronounced stair-stepping effects and powder adhesion, especially at low angles. Microstructural characterization confirmed columnar grains spread through the bulk region and small equiaxed grains in the downskin region of the low-overhang angle bars. While the primary dendrite arm spacing remained consistent within the bulk, it increased in the downskin region due to reduced heat dissipation. Correspondingly, the micro-hardness remains consistent in the bulk region, it decreases in the downskin region for the overhang angles below 30°. Uniaxial-tensile tests demonstrate consistent strength, while elongation is higher for increased overhang angle.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".