MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2582502833 · doi:10.1080/02670844.2016.1258769

Heat treatment effect on wear behaviour of HVOF-sprayed near-nanostructured coatings

2017· article· en· W2582502833 on OpenAlexafffund
Tanzil Mahmud, Tahir I. Khan, M.A. Farrokhzad

Bibliographic record

VenueSurface Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced materials and composites
Canadian institutionsAlberta InnovatesUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Innovates
KeywordsMaterials scienceAbrasiveThermal sprayingCoatingMicrostructureMetallurgyBrittlenessIndentationComposite materialIndentation hardnessWear resistanceNichrome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the effect of heat treatment on changes in microstructure and wear behaviour of WC-NiCr coatings. Two feedstock powders with a similar chemical composition and different particle sizes (near nano-structured WC-17NiCr and microstructured WC-15NiCr) were used. High-velocity oxyfuel spraying technique was used to deposit coatings on to a mild steel substrate using identical spraying parameters. Coated samples were then heat treated in a nitrogen atmosphere at 500 and 700°C. The effect of heat treatment on changes in hardness and wear performance of the coatings was studied using microstructural analysis, micro-hardness indentation and abrasive wear tests. The results showed that the heat treatment increased the hardness of both coatings and a corresponding increase in wear resistance was recorded. The formation of a brittle CrWO 4 phase in the microstructured coating resulted in brittle fracture of the coating and this gave lower wear resistance compared to the nanostructured coatings.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations22
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSurface EngineeringSame topicAdvanced materials and compositesFrench-language works237,207