MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1548491743 · doi:10.5006/c2010-10138

Erosion-Corrosion Assessment of WC-Based PTAW Overlays

2010· article· en· W1548491743 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Jones, R. Llewellyn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicErosion and Abrasive Machining
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrosionOverlayErosionMaterials scienceMetallurgyForensic engineeringGeologyComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Two commercially available tungsten carbide-based, Ni alloy binder PTAW overlays which had both previously exhibited excellent resistance to slurry erosion (in substantially non-corrosive conditions) and abrasion were assessed in a more corrosive wear slurry environment. One overlay consisted of a 50 vol.% mixture of crushed eutectic (WC/W2C), spherical eutectic and macrocrystalline WC particles in a NiBFeSi matrix, whilst the other contained 50 vol.% macrocrystalline WC in a NiCrBSi matrix. Initial microstructural examination of the mixed carbide/NiBSi overlay, confirmed that substantial dissolution/degradation of the spherical eutectic and crushed eutectic carbides had occurred as a consequence of interaction with its matrix alloy constituent at the high temperatures encountered during arc deposition. Conversely, the macrocrystalline WC-based overlay exhibited very limited carbide dissolution or degradation. The total erosion-corrosion (E-C) rate, as well as the separate components of erosion, corrosion and synergy, was established using a novel Slurry Pot Erosion Corrosion (SPEC) tester. The E-C rate for the macro WC/NiCrBSi overlay was approximately four times less than the E-C rate for the mixed carbide/NiBSi overlay, which performed comparatively poorly. The mixed carbide/NiBSi overlay displayed a very large synergistic value, which accounted for 90% of the total erosion-corrosion (E-C) rate, with the macro WC/NiCrBSi showing a synergy level accounting for 50% of the total E-C rate. To establish and compare the damage mechanisms affecting both overlays, a novel technique was implemented where specific regions were examined using a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) before and after SPEC testing. This procedure was applied to determine any preferential attack that was occurring and to elucidate the reasons for the significantly different E-C performance of the two products. The main reasons for the inferior performance of the mixed carbide/NiBSi overlay were found to be due to attack of the non-Cr bearing matrix and preferential removal of the W/Ni-rich boundary layer and eta- carbides, formed around the eutectic carbides during deposition.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

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)0.0230.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicErosion and Abrasive MachiningFrench-language works237,207