MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997522857

Thermal Spray Deposition of Metals on Polymer Substrates

2019· dissertation· W2997522857 on OpenAlexaff
B. Anand

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2019
Typedissertation
Language
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHermeneutics and Narrative Identity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeposition (geology)Materials sciencePolymerThermal sprayingChemical engineeringThermalMetallurgyComposite materialEngineeringGeologyMeteorologyPhysicsCoating
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aluminum and zinc were deposited using a twin-wire arc thermal spray torch onto smooth (Ra ~0.20 µm) and rough (Ra ~ 1.60 µm) samples of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE/Teflon®) and ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMW PE/ HDPE). Aluminum coatings did not adhere to the HDPE samples, however coatings roughly 300 to 400 µm thick were obtained on PTFE. Zinc adhered well to both surfaces. Adhesion tests and SEM imaging were performed to determine the strength and adhesion mechanism of the coatings. Increasing surface roughness enhanced coating adhesion strength. Additionally, deposition onto polymer substrates that were heated close to their glass-transition/softening temperatures resulted in increased adhesion strengths. SEM imaging suggested that mechanical interlocking increased with the metal onto a rough surface. Heating PTFE resulted in softening, increasing Interlocking, and the PE surface, with lower softening temperature, eroded by the impact of hot aluminum particles which removed the surface roughness and prevented adhesion.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

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)0.0050.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicHermeneutics and Narrative IdentityFrench-language works237,207