Hard Arc-Sprayed Coating with Enhanced Erosion and Abrasion Wear Resistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Exposed to particle erosion environments, metal-sprayed coatings are damaged by micro-machining and ploughing at low impact angles. The generation and propagation of subsurface lateral cracks at high impacting angles damage single-phase ceramic coatings. Therefore, multicomponent coatings deposited by high-energy processes have been widely used to provide wear protection in most of the applications. As commercial arc-sprayed coatings have been used to a limited extent in applications involving erosion and abrasion wear, developing attractive wear resistant arc-sprayed coatings has been found necessary. A cored wire formulation, referred to as Alpha-1800, has been developed to produce tailored arc-sprayed coatings that are tough enough to resist particle impacts at 90° and sufficiently hard to deflect eroding particles at low impact angles. Typical 1 mm-thick coatings composed of ductile and hard phases with Knoop hardness reaching 1800 kg/mm2 were easily produced by arc spraying the cored wire with air. Coatings were: 1) erosion tested at 25°C and higher temperatures at impact angles of 25° and 90° in a gas-blast erosion rig, 2) slurry erosion tested at impact angles of 25° and 90°, 3) abrasion wear tested using the ASTM G-65 test procedure. Results show that coatings produced with the new cored wire are at least 5 times more erosion resistant and 10 times more abrasion resistant than coatings produced by arc spraying commercial cored wires. The performance of the new arc-sprayed coating can be compared with that of high-energy WC-based coatings. Being thermally stable up to 850°C, arc-sprayed coatings produced with the new cored wire are attractive for applications in many industrial sectors up to high temperatures.
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".