MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Determination of Thermal Barrier Coatings Layers Optimum Thickness via PSO-SA Hybrid Optimization Method concerning Thermal Stress

2019· article· en· W2980530193 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Coating Science and Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHigh-Temperature Coating Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermal barrier coatingMaterials scienceThermalComposite materialStress (linguistics)Structural engineeringEngineeringThermodynamicsCoatingPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Turbine entry temperature of turbo-engines has been increased to improve proficiency. Consequently, protecting the hot section elements experiencing aggressive service conditions necessitates the applying of thermal barrier coatings (TBC). Developing TBC systems and improving performance is an ongoing endeavour to prolong the lifetime. Thus, various studies have been conducted to find the optimum properties and dimensions. In this paper, the optimum thickness of intermediate bond coat (BC) and top coat (TC) have been determined via a novel hybrid particle swarm and simulated annealing stochastic optimization method. The optimum thicknesses have been achieved under the constraint of thermal stress induced by thermal fatigue, creep, and oxidation in the TC while minimizing the weight during twenty cycles. The solutions for BC and TC thicknesses are respectively 50 μm and 450 μm. Plane stress condition has been adopted for theoretical and finite element stress analysis, and the results are successfully compared.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.244 · 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