2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.wear.2015.02.034
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

HVOF sprayed coatings of nano-agglomerated tungsten-carbide/cobalt powders for water droplet erosion application

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
22
0
3

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
22
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Coating technologies such as PVD (physical vapor deposition), APS (atmospheric plasma spray) or VPS (vacuum plasma spray) and HVOF (high-velocity oxygen fuel) have been well developed for high-quality coating systems. A high level of erosion resistance has been well veri ed in laboratory experiments [1][2][3][4] . The erosion resistance of metalceramic composites was evaluated for the previous paper 5) .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Coating technologies such as PVD (physical vapor deposition), APS (atmospheric plasma spray) or VPS (vacuum plasma spray) and HVOF (high-velocity oxygen fuel) have been well developed for high-quality coating systems. A high level of erosion resistance has been well veri ed in laboratory experiments [1][2][3][4] . The erosion resistance of metalceramic composites was evaluated for the previous paper 5) .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Erosion results are usually represented in terms of cumulative material loss versus the cumulative erosion exposure duration, as shown in Figure 11. The cumulative material loss (vertical axis) is either plotted using mass loss [98,123], or volume loss [124] so that different types of information can be captured. ASTM standard G73-10 [80] recommends the use of volume loss where the density of the material is used to convert the mass loss into volume loss.…”
Section: Data Representationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless, this traditional representation of the erosion is lacking of important information about the experimental conditions, eg, the impacting water on the samples per cycle. Therefore, some authors reported the erosion results taking into account the impacting water, eg, Seleznev et al considered the mass of the impacting water on the sample surfaces and Mahdipoor et al the volume of impacting water per unit of area of the sample surface. Although these methods of reporting the erosion clearly improve the method proposed by the ASTM G73 standard test and they allow to compare the results obtained using drops of different sizes, they are still missing other relevant information about the experimental conditions, eg, running time, impingement velocity of drops, speed of sample, impact frequency, etc.…”
Section: Rain Erosion In Blade Leading Edgementioning
confidence: 99%