Cold Spray and Reaction Sintering of Ti-TiAl3 Composite Coatings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recently a Ti–TiAl3 metal–intermetallic laminate (MIL) composite attracts growing attention because they have potential application in honeycomb or sandwich components of airplanes and as biomaterial with good bio-compatibility. Of the available processing techniques, diffusion bonding of elemental titanium and aluminum foils is an effective low-temperature method to synthesize the composite, allowing growth of the intermetallic layer. However, application of assembling and multi-pass cold rolling operations leads to fact that this technology is complex and expensive. The use of Cold Spray technology instead of aluminum foils utilization and multi-pass cold rolling to produce the Ti–TiAl3 MIL composites is believed to be more effective. However, reaction diffusion kinetics of Ti-Al particulate composite differs from that of classical MIL composite and needs to be studied. The task of this paper is to define microstructural changes of Tl-TiAl3 composite coating during cold spraying and reaction sintering. The optical microscopy, SEM, EDS, X-ray and microhardness examinations are presented and discussed.
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".