Stress and Damage Analyses of Thermal Barrier Coatings Under Cyclic Thermal Loading Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The premature failure of the thermal barrier coatings (TBCs) system is a preliminary phenomenon that can significantly limit their applications in gas turbine engines.The delamination of TBCs occurs typically at interfaces between the top coat and bond coat due to thermal mismatch stress via both crack nucleation and propagation and decohesion.In this thesis, this phenomenon was studied using a multi-physics approach.Under a high-temperature adverse environment, multiple factors are coupled to lead to the failure through creep, sintering of top coat, oxide growth and interface imperfection.Heat transfer was implemented into the TBC model in a cyclic manner to simulate the in-service operation of hot section components.The periodic cross-sectional model of the TBCs was modelled with the phase field damage model addressing the stress evolution and fracture-damage evolution of top coat.Results demonstrate that the model well couples the above factors, and the top coat cracks at off-peak of interfacial rumpling propagate rapidly during an early stage and stop growing as the TGO is thickened.The crack propagation results are correlative to the stress evolution during the thermal cycles, which partially proves the quality of crack propagation simulation results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".