Crack Driving Forces of Atmospheric Plasma-Sprayed Thermal Barrier Coatings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-temperature operation service conditions can be used to evaluate the durability of Atmospheric Plasma-Sprayed Thermal Barrier Coating systems (APS-TBCs). To evaluate the durability of TBCs within their life span, two different thermal cycling testing results, i.e., isothermal furnace cycling and burner rig cycling tests, are utilized to numerically investigate possible crack driving forces that might lead to the failure of TBCs. Although there are many studies on failure and life prediction, there is still a lack of quantitative evaluation and comparison on the crack driving forces under these two different thermal cycling schemes. In this paper, by using modified analytical models, strain energy release rates (ERRs) are estimated and compared between these two testing approaches using experimental data. A new residual stress model was developed to study the position where the maximum residual stress occurs due to coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) mismatch at different thermally grown oxide (TGO) thicknesses. The main crack driving forces are identified for two types of thermal cycling. A possible cracking route is found based on the calculated equivalent ERRs with respect to distance from the interface between the topcoat (TC)/TGO layers. The relationship between crack driving force of isothermal furnace and burner cycling tests is also elaborated.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".