High‐Temperature Performance of Alumina–Zirconia Composite Coatings Containing Amorphous Phases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Amorphous phases are commonly found in nanostructured plasma‐sprayed coatings. Nonetheless, the role of these phases in the resulting coatings’ properties has remained uninvestigated until now. In the present work, pseudo‐eutectic coatings—based on alumina and 8 wt% yttria‐stabilized zirconia (YSZ)—containing amorphous phases are produced using a suspension‐plasma‐spray process. These composite materials are a potential choice for thermal‐barrier coating applications. The role of the amorphous phase on the performance of the coatings is investigated before and after heat treatment. Results show that, although the amorphous phases in untreated coatings reduce the thermal conductivity, they impair the mechanical properties. However, treatment above the crystallization temperature leads to better mechanical properties as well as enhanced high‐temperature stability of the resulting nanostructure. Moreover, the role of alumina as a stabilizer of high‐temperature YSZ phases (tetragonal and cubic) is confirmed and the high‐temperature phase stability of the alumina–YSZ composite is demonstrated. The amorphous phases are found to crystallize into their corresponding high‐temperature stable phases; i. e., α‐alumina and tetragonal zirconia.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".