Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Yadav, Deepesh

  • Google
  • 1
  • 6
  • 2

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (1/1 displayed)

  • 2024Growth selection induced residual stresses and fracture behavior of as‐deposited thermal barrier coatings2citations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Neog, Suruj Protim
1 / 1 shared
Curry, Nicholas
1 / 9 shared
Jaya, B. Nagamani
1 / 1 shared
Samajdar, Indradev
1 / 11 shared
Pai, Namit
1 / 2 shared
Joshi, Shrikant
1 / 10 shared
Chart of publication period
2024

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Neog, Suruj Protim
  • Curry, Nicholas
  • Jaya, B. Nagamani
  • Samajdar, Indradev
  • Pai, Namit
  • Joshi, Shrikant
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

Growth selection induced residual stresses and fracture behavior of as‐deposited thermal barrier coatings

  • Neog, Suruj Protim
  • Curry, Nicholas
  • Jaya, B. Nagamani
  • Samajdar, Indradev
  • Yadav, Deepesh
  • Pai, Namit
  • Joshi, Shrikant
Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>This study explored the impact of microstructure and residual stresses on the fracture behavior of as‐deposited thermal barrier coatings (TBCs). Two distinct air plasma sprayed TBCs, Coating A (conventional lamellar porous) and Coating B (dense vertically cracked), were investigated. Coating A involved coarser but less dense powders as feedstock and a lower substrate temperature during deposition. Further, Coating A hadtimes higher randomly oriented porosities, finer grains, lower hardness, and elastic stiffness. Strikingly, however, the fracture strength was higher for the porous as‐deposited Coating A. The answer to this apparent contradiction emerged from the intergranular residual stresses. These were measured using both X‐ray diffraction and high‐resolution‐electron backscattered diffraction. Coating B, deposited at a higher substrate temperature, had clear growth selection oforiented grains. These also had more out‐of‐plane normal and shear residual stresses. The growth selection induced residual stresses appeared responsible for the decohesion of Coating B from the substrate and, correspondingly, lower fracture strength.</jats:p>

Topics
  • Deposition
  • porous
  • grain
  • laser emission spectroscopy
  • strength
  • hardness
  • fracture behavior