MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1904341417 · doi:10.3390/coatings5040576

A Comprehensive Review on Fluid Dynamics and Transport of Suspension/Liquid Droplets and Particles in High-Velocity Oxygen-Fuel (HVOF) Thermal Spray

2015· review· en· W1904341417 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohsen Jadidi, Sara Moghtadernejad, Ali Dolatabadi

Bibliographic record

VenueCoatings · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsThermal sprayingSuspension (topology)CombustionMaterials scienceCoatingMechanicsThermalGas dynamic cold sprayParticle (ecology)Mechanical engineeringComposite materialThermodynamicsEngineeringChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In thermal spraying processes, molten, semi-molten, or solid particles, which are sufficiently fast in a stream of gas, are deposited on a substrate. These particles can plastically deform while impacting on the substrate, which results in the formation of well-adhered and dense coatings. Clearly, particles in flight conditions, such as velocity, trajectory, temperature, and melting state, have enormous influence on the coating properties and should be well understood to control and improve the coating quality. The focus of this study is on the high velocity oxygen fuel (HVOF) spraying and high velocity suspension flame spraying (HVSFS) techniques, which are widely used in academia and industry to generate different types of coatings. Extensive numerical and experimental studies were carried out and are still in progress to estimate the particle in-flight behavior in thermal spray processes. In this review paper, the fundamental phenomena involved in the mentioned thermal spray techniques, such as shock diamonds, combustion, primary atomization, secondary atomization, etc., are discussed comprehensively. In addition, the basic aspects and emerging trends in simulation of thermal spray processes are reviewed. The numerical approaches such as Eulerian-Lagrangian and volume of fluid along with their advantages and disadvantages are explained in detail. Furthermore, this article provides a detailed review on simulation studies published to date.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations78
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCoatingsSame topicFluid Dynamics and Heat TransferFrench-language works237,207