Understanding the effect of surface topography on the formation of aerosol-deposited coatings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aerosol deposition (AD) has attracted attention in the ceramic coating field as it can produce dense nanocrystalline ceramic films at room temperature. Research in the AD field has focused on coating formation on flat surfaces, with limited exploration of deposition on patterned substrates. In this work, we describe the microstructure of a dense alumina coating deposited by AD on micropillar-patterned silicon substrates through SEM and TEM analyses. To understand the coating formation mechanism on the micro-patterned substrate, interfacial analysis has been performed using high-resolution TEM. Pressure-induced amorphous Si regions are observed at the coating-substrate interfaces, indicating severe particle impacts during deposition that contribute to the strong adhesive bonding in AD. The interfaces at different locations, including the peaks, sidewalls, and valleys of the pillars, showed distinct characteristics that demonstrated how substrate topography in AD affected interfacial bonding and particle impact behaviors. • Alumina films were fabricated on patterned Si substrates by aerosol deposition. • The coatings deposited between the pillars show high density without microcracks. • Thick amorphous Si layer is seen at coating-substrate interfaces near pillar peaks. • The particle impact behaviours are explained through HRTEM analysis.
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".