MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293543532 · doi:10.31399/asm.cp.itsc2005p0239

Cold Spray Nozzle Design and Performance Evaluation using Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV)

2005· article· en· W4293543532 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. Pattison, R. Morgan, S. Celotto, A. Khan, B. O'Neill

Bibliographic record

VenueThermal spray · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHigh-Temperature Coating Behaviors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle image velocimetryGas dynamic cold sprayNozzleCritical ionization velocityComputational fluid dynamicsMaterials scienceMechanicsDragEntrainment (biomusicology)Particle velocityVelocimetrySpray characteristicsMechanical engineeringParticle (ecology)AccelerationSpray nozzleComposite materialEngineeringPhysicsClassical mechanicsAcousticsTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Based on the principles of cold spray, Cold Gas Dynamic Manufacturing (CGDM) is a high-velocity metal spraying process capable of the high-rate deposition of dissimilar materials under cold conditions. However, unlike many cold-spraying techniques that have focussed primarily on surface coatings, the CGDM process has been tailored for solid free-form fabrication. Central to the needs of the process is the ability to accelerate the feedstock powder – through entrainment into a high-velocity gas flow – to speeds in excess of its critical deposition velocity. The critical factor here is not the gas velocity but rather the ultimate particle velocity; and it is the drag force experienced by the individual powder particles that affect their velocity. This paper documents the methods used to predict, model and validate nozzle performance – in terms of particle acceleration and ultimate velocity – via Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) and Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV). Results are presented and discussed pertaining to the effects of nozzle type (de Laval, MLN etc.) and geometry, as well as gas type (Helium and Nitrogen), composition and temperature. Abstract only; no full-text paper available.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThermal spraySame topicHigh-Temperature Coating BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207