TGO Growth and Crack Propagation in a Thermal Barrier Coating
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In thermal barrier coating (TBC) systems, a continuous alumina layer developed at the ceramic topcoat/bond coat interface helps to protect the metallic bond coat from further oxidation and improve the durability of the TBC system under service conditions. However, other oxides such as spinel and nickel oxide, formed in the oxidizing environment, are believed to be detrimental to TBC durability during service at high temperatures. It was shown that in an air-plasma-sprayed (APS) TBC system, post-spraying heat treatments in low-pressure oxygen environments could suppress the formation of the detrimental oxides by promoting the formation of an alumina layer at the ceramic topcoat/bond coat interface, leading to an improved TBC durability. This work presents the influence of post-spraying heat treatments in low-pressure oxygen environments on the oxidation behaviour and durability of a thermally sprayed TBC system with high-velocity oxy-fuel (HVOF)-produced Co-32Ni-21Cr-8Al-0.5Y (wt.%) bond coat. Oxidation behaviour of the TBCs is evaluated by examining their microstructural evolution, growth kinetics of the thermally grown oxide (TGO) layers, as well as crack propagation during low frequency thermal cycling at 1050°C. The relationship between the TGO growth and crack propagation will also be discussed.
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".