ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Evaluating the Homogeneity of Surface Features Induced by Impact-Based Surface Treatments.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Extending conventional surface roughness ISO parameters using topological data analysis for shot peened surfaces.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Impact surface treatments are well-known for their efficiency in enhancing the mechanical properties of metallic materials, especially under cyclic loadings. These processes, which encompass a wide range of surface treatments based on repetitive impacts of tools of various types, induce surface plastic deformation, compressive residual stresses, and grain refinement alter the surface roughness as a side effect. Thus, it is essential to have suitable indexes to quantify the surface features caused by the typically random nature of these treatments. Herein, we evaluated the rationality of using standard roughness parameters for describing the morphological characteristics of surfaces treated by shot peening as a representative and widely used treatment of the category. A detailed numerical model of the peening process was developed. The output data were elaborated to extract the surface roughness parameters following the standard procedures. The results revealed the validity of the surface roughness parameters to describe the topography of material treated with adequate surface coverage, also highlighting the necessity to use a set of parameters rather than the common practice of relying on single parameters. Not considering a comprehensive set of amplitude and spacing parameters can result in significant, inconsistent, and misleading results while comparing the performance of surfaces.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.