Oxidation Behaviour of Conventional and Nanocrystalline CoNiCrAlY Bond Coats Manufactured by Cold Spray
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the present study is to investigate and compare the oxidation behaviour of conventional and nanocrystalline CoNiCrAlY bond coats. The nanocrystalline feedstock powder is produced from the conventional feedstock powder using the cryogenic milling process. Conventional and nanocrystalline bond coats are produced using the Cold Spray (CS) process in order to avoid the onset of thermally induced grain growth and minimize the inclusion of oxides in the bond coat microstructure. The oxidation behaviour of free-standing CoNiCrAlY coating samples is determined by means of isothermal oxidation experiments consisting of heat treatments in air at 1000°C for various periods of time. Characterization of the feedstock powders and resulting CS coatings, as well as investigation of the oxide scale growth dynamics, is achieved by means of SEM, XRD and TEM analyses. Mass gain measurements were also carried out throughout the oxidation tests to evaluate oxide growth rates.
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".