MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Preliminary Development of Cold Spray Procedures for Nickel Aluminum Bronze Casting Repair

2021· article· en· W3119269716 on OpenAlexaff
Cameron Munro, Phuong Vo, Bruno Guerreiro

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials science forum · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMetallurgy and Material Science
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceMetallurgyCorrosionToughnessBronzePorosityWeldingCastingCathodic protectionAluminiumAlloyMicrostructureComposite materialElectrochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nickel aluminum bronze (NAB) castings possess favourable combinations of strength and resistance to corrosion, biofouling and cavitation/erosion, and so have long been used in naval applications. Nonetheless, in seawater environments NAB castings are susceptible to selective phase corrosion and so such components periodically require either replacement, which is very costly, or repair. However, repairs involving traditional, high heat input welding operations can lead to distortion and microstructural changes that unacceptably degrade NAB corrosion performance, and so repairs are not commonly performed. In the present work, cold spray is explored as an alternative for NAB (alloy CuAl9Fe5Ni5) repair without excessive distortion or base metal degradation, and preliminary results of its performance reported. Suitable cold spray parameters have been determined using an iterative approach by analyzing deposits in terms of microstructure, porosity and adhesion to the substrate. It is intended that these parameters will later be used to create simulated repairs which can be more thoroughly characterized for strength, toughness and corrosion performance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials science forumSame topicMetallurgy and Material ScienceFrench-language works237,207