MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3168148903 · doi:10.31399/asm.cp.itsc2021p0396

Peridynamic Simulation of Particles Impact and Interfacial Bonding in Cold Spray Process

2021· article· en· W3168148903 on OpenAlexaff
Baihua Ren, Jun Song

Bibliographic record

VenueThermal spray · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNumerical methods in engineering
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeridynamicsMaterials scienceAdhesiveGas dynamic cold sprayDeposition (geology)Fracture (geology)Deformation (meteorology)Particle (ecology)Composite materialComputer simulationThermal sprayingAdhesionFinite element methodCoatingMechanicsStructural engineeringLayer (electronics)Continuum mechanicsPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recently, cold spray (CS) technology has attracted extensive interest as an alternative to thermal spray methods to build a coating, which uses high kinetic energy solid particles to impact and adhere to the substrate. To date, numerous numerical studies have been carried out to investigate the deposition processes and associated mechanisms during multiple particle impact in CS. However, in the commonly used numerical techniques, the individual powder particles are often treated separately from one another, thus fail to properly consider the adhesion mechanisms during deposition. In this study, we propose a new numerical approach on base of peridynamics (PD), which incorporates interfacial interactions as a part of constitutive model to capture deformation, bonding and rebound of impacting particles in one unified framework. Two models are proposed to characterize the adhesive contacts: a) a long-range Lenard-Johns type potential that reproduce the mode I fracture energy by suitable calibrations, and b) a force - stretch relation of interface directly derived from the bulk materials mode I fracture simulations. The particle deformation behavior modeled by the peridynamic method compares well with the benchmark finite element method results, which indicates the applicability of the peridynamic model for CS simulation. Furthermore, it is shown that the adhesive contact models can accurately describe interfacial bonding between the powder particles and substrate.

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 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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThermal spraySame topicNumerical methods in engineeringFrench-language works237,207