Deposition of Commercially Pure Titanium Powder Using Low Pressure Cold Spray and Pulsed Gas Dynamic Spray for Aerospace Repairs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study is to investigate the feasibility of depositing 1.5 mm thick titanium coatings, as a repair method for aerospace Ti-6Al-4V substrates, using two new commercially available processes: Low Pressure Cold Spray (LPCS) and Pulsed Gas Dynamic Spray (PGDS). The coatings produced were examined and characterized by their porosity level, microhardness, adhesion strength, particle flattening ratio, wipe tests, fracture surface type and wear tests. Phases and chemical composition were determined using X-Ray diffraction analysis and energy dispersive spectroscopy, respectively. It was found that both spraying processes are capable of producing dense, hard and oxide-free coatings using specific parameters. Finally, as a first step towards repair implementation of these processes, damages were simulated on Ti-6Al-4V samples, which were successfully repaired with low porosity and high hardness levels. The feasibility of repairs was confirmed, the next step will consist in qualification testing to assess coating performances under real life application.
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".