Development and Evaluation of Anti-Abrasion Polymer Coatings for Circulation Coins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Royal Canadian Mint (RCM) has always been active in finding and supporting new and advanced coin production technologies. Most recently it revealed interest in polymer based coatings for its circulation coins. The motivation behind this development is to provide antiabrasion, anti-corrosion and anti-bacterial abilities thus increasing the life span of coins in circulation. Polyurethane, polytetrafluoroethylene, advanced liquid glass, standard liquid glass and silicon R-2180 are selected and applied onto brass plated blank coins (loonies) and their wear resistance is investigated. Following coating application using a WS-650 spin coater, polyurethane, advanced liquid glass and silicon R-2180 showed satisfactory visual appearance in compliance with standards set by the Royal Canadian Mint. Pin-on-disc wear test is conducted on coated brass blanks; both advanced liquid glass and polyurethane exhibits superior results when compared to silicon R-2180. An additional abrasion test is carried out using a tumbling machine. Periodic tumbling is carried out in increments of 5 hr for 25 hr to assess the wear resistance of the three candidate materials. Over all, advanced liquid glass maintains 40% of the coating after 25 hr of tumbling compared to only 20% and 5% for polyurethane and silicon R-2180, respectively.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".