Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333

www.elsevier.com/locate/commatsci

Modeling of the APS plasma spray process using

artificial neural networks: basis, requirements and an example
Sofiane Guessasma, Ghislain Montavon *, Christian Coddet
Laboratoire d’Etudes et de Recherches sur les Mat
eriaux, les Plasmas et les Surfaces (LERMPS),
Universit
e de Technologie de Belfort-Montb
eliard (UTBM), Site de S
evenans, 90 010 Belfort Cedex, France
Received 22 April 2003; received in revised form 1 October 2003; accepted 15 October 2003

Abstract

Thermal spraying is a versatile technique to manufacture coatings which offers a large choice of processes (i.e.,
plasma spraying, flame spraying, electric arc spraying, etc.) and materials (i.e., metallic, ceramic, polymer and com-
posite materials). To obtain functional coatings exhibiting selected in-service properties, combinations of processing
parameters have to be planned. These combinations differ by their cost and by their influence on the coating properties
and characteristics. In order to control the manufacturing process, one of the challenges nowadays is to recognize
parameter interdependencies, correlations and individual effects on coating properties and characteristics and influences
on the in-service properties. This is why a robust methodology is needed to study theses interrelated effects. A statistical
method, responding to the previous constrains, was implemented to correlate the atmospheric plasma spray processing
parameters to the coating properties. This methodology is based on artificial neural networks which is a technique
based on database training to predict property-parameter evolutions. This introductory work points out the imple-
mentation protocol, the database construction, the optimization process and an example of predicted results related
to the deposition yield (i.e., deposited thickness per pass).

2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

PACS: 07.05.M; 81.15.R; 07.05.M; 81.15

Keywords: Process modeling; Processing parameters; In-flight particle characteristics; Coating properties and characteristics;
Deposition yield

1. Introduction composites such as cermets) implementing several

Thermal spraying is a versatile technique to
manufacture coatings of a wide variety of materi-
als (i.e., metallic alloys, ceramics, polymers and
* tures above the melting point of the considered
Corresponding author. Tel.: +33-03-84-58-31-65; fax: +33-
03-84-58-32-86.
E-mail address: ghislain.montavon@utbm.fr (G. Monta-
von).
processes [1–4]. This technique permits to solve
numerous problems of wear, corrosion and ther-
mal degradation. The atmospheric plasma spray-
ing (APS) is one of these processes that consist in
heating up at ‘‘high’’ temperatures (i.e., tempera-
material) a feedstock powder in a plasma jet (Fig.
1). Powder particles are fused and simultaneously
accelerated towards the material to be coated

0927-0256/$ - see front matter
2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.commatsci.2003.10.007
316 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333
Fig. 1. Some facets of plasma spray techniques.
where the impact, sprayed and solidify to form
thin lamellae. The coating results from the staking
of those lamellae and exhibits hence an anisotropic
structure. Nowadays, challenges related to thermal
spray process concern the improvement of spray
systems [5], development of innovative techniques
such as cold spray and laser plasma hybrid spray
[6,7], spraying of new materials and using new
technologies [8]. These aspects require a better
understanding of the involved phenomena (i.e.,
physical, chemical, thermodynamical, etc.). How-
ever, this understanding is strongly penalized by
the complexity of the process (Fig. 2) and the re-
lated treatments, among them:
• the process parameters: up to 50 parameters
control the process [1];
• the process correlations and the parameter in-
terdependencies: extensive studies demonstrated
the complex nature of the correlations existing
between the processing parameters and the
coating properties [2–5];
• the none equilibrium phenomena: coating for-
mation is operated under high solidification
rates (i.e., in the order of 106 K s
1 ) which leads
to complex phase repartitions [9];
• the process instabilities, fluctuations, noise and
temporal degradation: the deposit quality
proved to depend mostly on the operating con-
dition fluctuations, tools lifetimes and plasma
jet instabilities [10–12].
In front of these constrains, numerous studies
aim at explaining totally or partially the process
mechanisms, either by analytical [13–15] or sta-
tistical [16–18] models. However, these models
suffer from the simplification hypotheses required
to process more easily the parameters–properties
correlations and from the limited number of
operating conditions that can be processed. They
 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333 317

input pattern hidden layers output pattern

feedstock materials
•nature feedstock injection process
neuron k
•composition •mode •power supply
•particle shape •gas nature •gas nature wi1 Ok
•size distribution •gas flow rate •torch design
wi2
wki
neuron i
in-flight particle characteristics wij
•temperature Oi
•velocity
•diameter
•trajectory
work piece wiNE-1
•shape
•surface preparation
wiNE
•thermodynamic properties
deposit formation mechanisms
•lamella morphology
•degree of flattening
•"splashing" ratio
•bonding ratio
Fig. 3. Typical ANN structure. The arrows represent the
deposit structure incoming and outgoing flux of neurons.
•thickness
•cohesion
•phase composition
•residual stress level the processing parameters [31–33] (each parameter
can hold one or several neurons 1) and an output
in service properties
cinematic vector of neurons, which is the system response;
•adhesion
•gun manipulator i.e., the coating characteristics [31] (each charac-
•mechanical properties
•trajectories
•thermo-mechanical properties
•physico-chemical properties
•velocities teristic can also be characterized by one or several
neurons 1). A set of neurons, organized in so-
Fig. 2. Flowchart describing thermal spray process com- called hidden layers, connect these two vectors
pounds. following different possible schemes [34]. The
parameter value is specified by a number repre-
are hence very often reduced to treat distinct parts senting a nerve pulse, or excitation, normalized
of the problem, such as the coating formation generally in the range (0–1). The boundary values
mechanisms [9,15,19–23], the plasma jet properties correspond in this case to the minimal and maxi-
[1,13,18,24–26], the in-flight particle characteristics mal values that could be reached; i.e., the process
and their interactions with the jet and substrate limitations. The problem specificities and the
[9,10,13,24,27–29], etc. Aware about these limita- process parameters are encoded in the connections
tions, another approach, considering the process between neurons by features called weights [34].
more globally and encoding the physical phe- These weights represent a fundamental concept in
nomena as a complex structure of correlations, discovering parameter relationships. They trans-
was considered. This model is derived from the late the opportunity to communicate the result of a
artificial intelligence domain; i.e., artificial neural ‘‘within unit manipulation’’ to another unit by a
networks (ANNs), which proved to be an efficient coefficient fixing the contribution of a parameter
predictive concept, a robust design and an opti- influence on the final result. Because the connec-
mization technique applied to material science tion tree between a given characteristic–processing
problems [30]. parameters pair is important, numerous possibili-
ties and high flexibility with regard to parameter
variations and fluctuations characterize the ANN
2. Mathematical model models.

ANN is a mathematical architecture of units

called neurons (Fig. 3). It comprises an input 1
The number of neurons is equal to the independent
vector of neurons, symbolizing in this specific case variable number required to quantify one parameter.
318 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333
In such a way, a connection is simply a product
of the carried-out pulse by the weight. A negative
weight contributes to the pulse inhibition, whereas
a positive weight strengthens the nerve signal. A
near zero weight means that the considered con-
nection is not required. The value of each weight is
initially unknown and the computation starts with
an arbitrary set of weights. This is why databases
are needed to adjust each weight result and this
step is called the ANN training procedure. An
optimal set that describes the solution results from
the ANN training step. Then, the flexibility of the
trained ANN permits the prediction of the output
vector giving preliminary conditions, even if these
starting conditions do not belong exactly to the
operating subspace.
From a mathematical point of view, this con-
cept is translated as follows. At the input of a
given unit i, the sum of the NE signals received
from the input pattern added to the unit bias can
be written as follows [31]:
Ii ¼ wij Oj ; j ¼ 1; . . . ; NE þ 1; ONE þ1 ¼ 1
Oj is the output pulse intensity of the input unit j,
wij is the connection weight between neuron i and
neuron j or, in other words, the coefficients of the
linear regression representing the flux at neuron i
with NE neurons being the variables of this
regression. wNEþ1 ONE
1 is the bias introduced by
the cell i (i.e., also so-called constant of the linear
regression).
This flux is then modified by an activation
function (i.e., a transfer function) that operates
a non-linear conversion of the pulse. This gives
an output at unit I, expressed as follows [31]:
Oi ¼ f ðIi Þ
In fact, this transformation translates the non-
linearity of the problem with regard to its variables
permitting to process complex correlations.
The easiest way to direct the weight values to-
wards the required response is to impose a crite-
rion to minimize the quadratic error. This criterion
can be written as follows [34,42]:
 
2 particle size distribution, particle morphology and
o 12 ðr
rk Þ
Dwkl ¼
a ð3Þ
owkl
where r is the desired response, rk is the response
obtained at step k and a is the training rate.
This auto-correction process is then moved
‘‘backward’’ or ‘‘back-propagated’’ to the input
vector. Implementing this protocol, the accuracy
in describing an optimal ANN structure is condi-
tioned by:
• a ‘‘well thought’’ database, representing, in the
weight space, a good sampling of the behaviors
that can occur during the thermal spray pro-
cess;
• the manner in which the database is submitted
to the ANN;
• the way of dimensioning the ANN architecture
(i.e., number of optimal hidden layers, number
of units per layer and connections);
• the time spent in training (i.e., number of itera-
tive steps).
3. Model implementation
ð1Þ
Thermal spraying is considered as a non-linear
problem with respect to its variables, either pro-
perties or operating conditions. The variable de-
finition in the ANN model is an important
preliminary before considering the process opti-
mization. This definition includes especially the
neuron number representing the attribute or the
operating conditions, the limiting range and
the describing of the way the variable is correlated
to the others. The problem is actually divided to
three categories (Fig. 4).
3.1. Processing parameters
ð2Þ These variables are considered as the input
vector in the ANN structure. They are enumerated
as follows.
3.1.1. Feedstock powder parameters
Numerous powder types can be sprayed. Their
characteristics constitute very important activators
and need to be studied carefully [35–37]. These
latter include powder nature, powder composition,
phases. From a mathematical point of view, these
variables are considered as follows:
 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333
thermal
systemic
spray
relationships
conditions
systemic relationships
Fig. 4. Chart representation of thermal spray variables and
relationships.
• the powder nature is looked as to be a selection
parameter. It requires n neurons describing 2n
powder varieties;
• powder composition considers as many neurons
as elements describing their percentages;
• particle size distribution is regarded as size clas-
ses with one neuron for each class;
• particle morphology is treated with indexes cor-
responding for each one to one neuron;
• powder phases like composition are described
with one neuron for each phase percentage.
3.1.2. Torch characteristics
This parameter proved to be a critical parame-
ter influencing the plasma jet and the in-flight
particle characteristics [25,26,38]. The geometry
of the gun plays an eminent roll in the character-
istics of the plasma jet. Several families of design
can be found. Too many geometric parameters
would have to be considered to fully describe the
gun design. However, the diameter outlet can be
a good indicator in the case of conventional noz-
zles [38]. It can be processed either as a selection
parameter or a continuous variable. In the first
case, 6, 7 or 8 mm diameter nozzle, for example,
can be described with 22 neurons. In the second
case, one neuron can gather with 33.33% of data
repartition each value. This variable explains
mostly the jet expansion, temperature and velocity.
319
3.1.3. Powder injection parameters
Generally, these parameters have to be opti-
deposit
microstructure mized in a relatively narrow range [39]. This con-
cerns the feedstock rate, the injector diameter, the
stand-off distance separating the injector tip from
the gun nozzle centerline axis, the injection angle
with respect to the plane containing the nozzle
causal centerline axis and the nature and the flow rate of
relationships
the feedstock carrier gas.
Except the carrier gas nature, which is regarded
as a classification variable, the other parameters
are characterized by one neuron each. The total
deposit
neuron number is multiplied by the number of
mechanicall injection ports in the case of the co-spraying of
properties
two or more dissimilar materials.
3.1.4. Spray distance
The spray distance is the easiest parameter to
tune from the set of processing parameters. It ex-
presses the distance separating the nozzle tip from
the piece to be coated. This parameter controls the
coating quality [18] through the control of the
particle flight duration and hence through their
characteristics, in terms of temperature and
velocity. In addition, thermal transfers from the jet
and the particles to the substrate are sensitive to
the spray distance. This parameter is characteri-
zed by one neuron.
3.1.5. Spray angle
The spray angle can be expressed as the angle
between the gun centerline axis and the surface
onto which particles impact. This angle influences
particularly the porosity level via the lamellae
shape [40,41]. In a first approximation, the impact
angle of the particles corresponds to the spray
angle. It is characterized by one neuron.
3.1.6. Arc current intensity
This parameter is one of the key factors in the
plasma spray process. It permits to vary the elec-
tric power of the spray gun and contributes to
modify the plasma net power. It controls directly
the in-flight particle characteristics increasing their
temperature and velocity [38]. It controls also
indirectly, but significantly, the microstructural
and mechanical properties of the coatings,
improving, for example, the hardness and the
320 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333
adhesion strength [36] and decreasing the porosity
level [18]. In the ANN model, this parameter is
described by one neuron.
3.1.7. Plasma gases
Usually, a plasma gas mixture constituted com-
monly by argon, hydrogen and sometimes helium is
used to adapt the plasma enthalpy, its thermal
conductivity and its viscosity [37]. Plasma gases can
be either expressed as a total flow rate and related
fractions or as individual flow rate contributions.
These parameters influence the plasma net enthalpy
[18] which in turn is directly correlated to the
in-flight particle characteristics and thus to the
mechanical and microstructural properties [18].
Whatever the case, the neuron number corresponds
to the number of described parameters.
3.1.8. Base material characteristics
The substrate type, its temperature during
spraying, its linear coefficient of thermal expan-
sion, its thermal conductivity and its Young
modulus are important variables, among others,
from which derive partially the adhesion of the
coatings and their residual stress levels [42,43].
Each characteristic can be described in that case by
one neuron, excepted for the substrate type selec-
tion which is described by 2n neurons, n repre-
senting the number of considered substrates.
3.1.9. Kinematic parameters
The scanning step and the spray velocity are
kinematic parameters influencing particularly the
deposit microstructure characteristics and the
thermal exchanges since they control, for a given
feedstock rate, the deposited thickness per pass.
They are considered as continuous variable
requiring one neuron for each one.
3.2. In-flight particle characteristics
The in-flight particle characteristics are impor-
tant variables which are extensively studied gener-
ally with the aid of infrared pyrometric tools which
detect the particle emitted radiations permitting the
determination of their temperature, velocity and
diameter [44]. These characteristics are conditioned
by the processing parameters, especially the injec-
tion conditions and the energetic parameters. They
are also sensitive to the plasma jet instabilities and
modifications due to the gun wear. In turn, these
characteristics influence the coating properties and
characteristics which state their importance in the
process correlations. Implemented in the ANN
structures as either an input or an output vector,
particle velocity, temperature and diameter are
continuous variables characterized by one neuron
for each one.
3.3. Microstructural properties and characteristics
3.3.1. Deposition yield
The deposition yield describes the deposed
thickness per pass. For defined processing param-
eters, it is mostly conditioned by the feedstock rate
and the kinematic parameters [45]. It is usually
estimated using a micrometer caliper. However,
more accurate results are obtained implementing
image analysis measurements [46]. This parameter
is characterized by one neuron.
3.3.2. Ratio parameters of the structural objects
of interest
The structural objects of interest are the phases,
porosities (intrasplat cracks, intersplat lamella
pores and globular pores [47]) and semi-molten
particle ratios. These are important microstruc-
tural indicators influencing the mechanical prop-
erties. For example, the increase of titania
percentage contained in alumina titania coatings
increases the adhesion strength and decreases the
microhardness [36]. These parameters are in turn
very sensitive to the processing parameters. For
example, porosity level increases with the decrease
of the current intensity, the increase of total plasma
gas flow rate, spray distance, etc. [18]. Parameter
values are usually determined using image analysis
and stereological protocols 2 to obtain 2-D or 3-D
2
Stereology, stricto sensu, deals with estimates for the
describing of a 3-D space, when only 2-D sections through
this space are available. It attempts to numerically characterize
the aspects of the features of 2-D sections, and to establish
relationships with those features in a 3-D space. The rules of
these estimates are based on geometric probabilities and are
called stereological protocols.
 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333
describing of the microstructure [46]. However,
other methodologies can be used to characterize
the three dimensional feature structure, such as
scattering techniques [48,49]. For each category,
one neuron is required to fully represent the
microstructure.
3.3.3. Pore interconnectivity
The pores form a three dimensional network
which can be revealed by most intrusion tech-
niques [49]. The pore interconnectivity has to be
quantitatively described with an index as it repre-
sents an important feature of the structure, influ-
encing the cohesion of the deposit, the thermal
insulation and the corrosion resistance. The index
definition depends mostly on the technique used
to quantify the pore structure [50].
3.3.4. Feature distributions
Heterogeneity of a feature distribution is diffi-
cult to estimate from the size distribution analysis.
The euclidean distance map can encode this het-
erogeneity [46]. It is obtained by constructing, for
a given family of objects of interest, a gray scale
map where a given point is attributed a gray level
representing the distance from its nearest neigh-
bor. The slope of the pixel distance to the gray
scale level curve expresses an index of hetero-
geneity. This index can be interpreted as a mean
statistical distance thus requiring one unit in a
neural structure.
3.3.5. Deposit roughness
This characteristic can be determined for both
the upper and the lower (i.e., the interface with the
substrate) coating surfaces [42]. The first one de-
scribes the finishing status whereas the other one
can be related to the mechanical adhesion of the
coating [51]. Deposit roughness obeys to texture
standards where several parameters are needed to
quantify adequately this property [52]: the rough-
ness conventional standards relate the geometrical
specifications mostly via height and spacing
parameters. Fractal dimension is another descrip-
tor which proved to offer global and detailed
descriptions at the same time [50,53]. As these
parameters are continuous variables, one neuron is
required to define each of them.
321
3.4. Mechanical properties and characteristics
3.4.1. Deposit hardness
Deposit hardness encodes numerous character-
istics. At this stage, when the applied load is lower
than 10 N (i.e., microindentation), deposit hard-
ness is an indicator of its structural cohesion.
Indentation test can be performed with a Vickers
indenter suitable for isotropic materials [54].
However, since the lamellae present an anisotropic
orientation, Knoop indentation better represents
the hardness property. Tests are sensitive to the
processing parameters but also to porosity level.
When the applied load is lower than 0.1 N (i.e.,
nanoindentation), deposit hardness becomes an
indicator of its intrinsic hardness and is related
to the phase nature. This property, whatever the
scale (i.e., the load) at which it is determined,
requires one neuron to describe it completely.
3.4.2. Deposit adhesion
Many different methodologies can be imple-
mented to determine the deposit adhesion [54,55].
The two major methodologies remain however the
tensile adhesion test [56], following for example the
ASTM C633-79 standard [57], and the interfacial
toughness indentation test [58]. Tensile adhesion
test appears as a macroscopic (i.e., global) indi-
cator whereas interfacial toughness test appears as
a microscopic (i.e., local) indicator. One neuron
represents, in the output pattern, the deposit
adhesion.
3.4.3. Residual stress level
Residual stresses influence highly the deposit
adhesion, the lamellae cohesion and the coating
mechanical properties [59]. Residual stresses ap-
pear at three distinct levels (i.e., solidification,
thermal dilation and allotropic transformations)
[60]: they are quantified either as extrinsic or
intrinsic. Extrinsic coating stresses are produced
by the rapid solidification of the lamellae (i.e.,
between 20 and 50 ls) and the subsequent thermal
gradient appearing during that process [59].
Depending on the sprayed material, intrinsic
residual stresses will develop during cooling of
lamellae when reaching the temperatures of allo-
tropic transformations. The difference in thermal
322 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333
linear dilation coefficients between the substrate
and the deposit contributes also to a significant
part of the extrinsic residual stresses [61]. Several
methods permits to indirectly estimate the residual
stress density, such as X-ray diffraction, hole dril-
ling method and curvature measurements [62],
among other methodologies. One neuron repre-
sents, in the output pattern, the average residual
stress level.
3.4.4. Elastic properties
Shear modulus, Poisson ratio and especially
Young modulus are related to most of the coating
mechanical properties [55]. Well established tests
(i.e., four-point bending test, indentation test, etc.)
permits the determination of these elastic proper-
ties [63] and each of them require one neuron to
describe this effect in the output pattern.
4. Calculation protocol
4.1. Database requirement
Experimental sets are required to train the
ANN in order to understand the parameters–
properties correlations. The database is built con-
sidering:
• experiments at the limit ranges of each parame-
ter; the other parameters being kept at a refer-
ence value;
• trivial situations which are added to settle the
physical limitations of the problem (i.e., for
example a zero arc current intensity does not
permit to generate a plasma jet and does not
permit hence to manufacture a deposit);
• other sets taking into account the intermediate
variations.
Generally speaking, a minimal number of exper-
iments is required to train adequately the ANN
structure. This number depends on the number of
neurons and connections in the network. Even if no
general rule applies to determine precisely the re-
quired number of experimental set results to satis-
factory train the network, one generally considers
that the following relationship is valid [31]:
W < E65  W ð4Þ
where W is the number of connections in the ANN
structure and E is the number of the input–output
couple results.
If the number of experiments is insufficient to
adequately train the ANN structure, a database
enlargement has to be considered. This enlarge-
ment is based on data standard deviation associ-
ated to average values or tolerance ranges. New
sets can in such conditions be defined as follows:
ðOk ; Ik Þnew ¼ ðOk ; Ik Þoriginal  randð Þ  ðrðok Þ; rðik ÞÞ
ð5Þ
where Ok , Oi is relative to the known pair of input–
output vectors, rand( ) a random number between
0 and 1 and r the associated standard deviation.
This database enlargement does not permit of
course to discover other correlations, but permits
to state a variability domain around a given point
in the phase space, namely the parameter space.
The enlarged database is then divided into three
categories, namely:
• a validation category, which is required to de-
fine the ANN architecture, precise the neuron
characteristics and adjust their number for each
layer;
• a training category, which is exclusively used to
adjust the network weights;
• a test category, which corresponds to the set
that validates the results of the training proto-
col.
4.2. ANN construction
ANN construction always begins by consider-
ing the input and output vector dimensions. These
dimensions are adapted to the nature of the
problem and to the correlations to be defined. As
the plasma spray process is considered to be a non-
linear problem, two or more hidden layers have to
be considered [34]. However, there is no general
rule to precise the number of neurons in the hidden
layers. Indeed, this number is appreciated
depending on the problem characteristics, on the
constructed database and on the neuron connec-
tion scheme.
 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333 323

The second step in the ANN construction is to
state the way neurons are connected. One of the
most popular schemes, well adapted to physical
problems, is the normal feed forward connection
scheme (Fig. 5), where fluxes are driven forward
from the input layer to the output layer without a
feedback [34]. This scheme proved to be sufficient
in the case of plasma spray process [64].
The third step in the ANN construction is to
consider the learning paradigm; i.e., the algorithm
permitting to optimize the weight population val-
ues. ANN bibliography is very rich with learning
models, like the popular back propagation and the
quick propagation [65,66], the Hebbian algorithm
[67], the ADALINE model [68] or the Kohonen
learning rule [69], among other models. In fact,
processing parameters
and
property definition
process history experimental sets
database
validation
architecture
this theoretical aspect is one of the most inten-
sively studied fields in the ANN methodology [34].
The most stable paradigm tested in the process
considered in this study is however the quick
propagation paradigm [70,71].
Other parameters have finally to be determined
adequately, such as for example the activation
function type for the non-linear conversion [34].
This function is adapted to the nature of the
neuron function. For example, a threshold-type
function is more adapted to classification variable
whereas a sigmoid-type function is more adapted
to continuous variables.
4.3. Training procedure
The training procedure is very likely one of the
most critical steps in the ANN optimization pro-
cess. It requires a special care to process the
database observations. After defining the learning
paradigm, the runs are submitted to the considered
ANN structure and the residual training error is
monitored. The submission can be either normal
(i.e., following the run rank order), shuffle (i.e.,
considering a random sequence through the set) or
random (i.e., with a random selection of samples).
Two cumulative criteria are used to stop the
training process:

• the maximum iteration criterion. If the training

learning paradigm
is stopped too early, the learning is not opti-
mized at all whereas if the training is stopped
hidden layers
too late, the ANN structure learns case by case
the database and produces 100% of data match,
neuron number
but only with the submitted database. In both
cases, generalization cannot be possible. Inter-
training
mediate cycles numbers are more suitable to
NO ‘‘smooth’’ the predicted correlation curves,
YES stopping without neglecting flexibility around each exper-
test
criteria imental condition value;
• the training error statistic criteria. These criteria
NO
include the training set error, the training set
stopping YES maximal error and the training set classification
criteria percentage [64]. The two first criteria can be de-
fined by several functions, like the mean square
generalization
error, the mean absolute error, the mean forth
power error, the hyperbolic square error [64],
Fig. 5. Flowchart of the ANN optimization process. among others.
324 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333
4.4. Test procedure
The test procedure permits to validate the re-
sults of the training process [34]. Two strategies
can be implemented for this procedure. On the one
hand, tests can be performed with the training
process, submitting a test case or a sequence after a
training case or sequence. On the other hand, tests
can be performed after the end of the training
procedure [34]. The cumulative criteria for the
stopping of the test procedure are the same as
those already defined for the training procedure
excepting the fact that they concern different
samples.
Fig. 5 summarizes the general implemented
protocol to design ANN characteristics.
5. Results
5.1. Experimental layout
Commercially available alumina–titania (i.e.,
Al2 O3 –TiO2 , 13 wt.%, Metco 130) powder was
used to manufacture coatings using APS under
various conditions (Fig. 6). A F4 gun (Sulzer-
Metco 3) operating at electric power levels up to 50
kW was used with a 6 mm standard anode, which
can handle approximately 80% of APS parame-
ters. The primary plasma gas was argon and the
secondary one was hydrogen. Table 1 summarizes
the spray parameters that were selected and varied.
In this study, plasma jet power parameters and
feedstock injection parameters, namely the total
plasma flow rate (Ar + H2 ), the hydrogen ratio
(H2 /Ar), the carrier gas flow rate (CG) and the
injector diameter (ID), were related to the depo-
sition yield. The other processing parameters were
kept unchanged to reference values.
The feedstock was plasma sprayed onto low
carbon steel coupons of 25 mm diameter and
10 mm thick.
After metallographic preparation, consisting of
cutting using an abrasive wheel, mounting in
3
Sulzer-Metco, Rigackerstrasse 16, 5160 Wohlen, Switzer-
land.
epoxy rings and diamond slurry polishing on an
automatic polishing system to enhance the process
reproducibility, the deposition yield (Y ), i.e., the
average thickness deposited per pass, was calcu-
lated using image analysis, where deposit cross-
sections were digitized and binarized. Averages of
overall thicknesses were calculated via a segmen-
tation protocol [46]. Average values were derived
from measurements carried out on 12 randomly
chosen fields of views. Results showed that the
deposition yield ranged from 0 to 8.21 lm (Table
2), depending on the process parameters.
5.2. In-flight particle characteristics
In-flight particle characteristics were monitored
on the basis of the analysis of their radiations
returning the particle flow rate, their tempera-
ture, their velocity and their diameter at the cen-
ter of the particle stream (i.e., the region of the
plasma jet where particles present the highest flow
rate) and at the spray distance. Two types of
measurements can be considered with this diag-
nostic tool:
• recording the in-flight particle characteristics
until a statistically significant count number is
derived (i.e., 10,000 valuable particle signals
for example) before averaging;
• recording the same information for a given time
(i.e., sampling time), for example 5 s, and then
averaging and repeating this count for a global
time (i.e., assessment time) which is generally 5
to 7 times greater than the sampling time.
Thousands of particle counts are hence re-
corded after an assessment time.
Results, for several processing parameters sets,
are listed in Table 3.
5.3. ANN optimization
Databases were constructed on the basis of the
carried-out experimental sets. As the number of
sets was not large enough, some of the validation
step parameters which proved to be reproducible
for an already studied problem [32,64] were fixed
in this study. Namely, these parameters concerned:
 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333 325

Fig. 6. Process of coating formation under APS conditions. (a) SEM micrograph typical of Metco 130 (Al2 O3 –13TiO2 ) feedstock
powder with a particle size of )53 to +15 lm. The photograph shows an elongated (clad) geometry. (b) SEM micrograph typical of
upper surface alumina–13wt.%titania coating showing a complex staking with open pores and microcracks. (c) Optical cross-section
micrograph of Al2 O3 –13wt.%TiO2 coating. I, Ar + H2 , H2 /Ar, CG, ID, Y , V, T, D symbols relate to arc current intensity, total plasma
volume flow rate, hydrogen fraction, carrier gas flow rate, injector internal diameter, deposition yield, particle average velocity, average
temperature and average diameter, respectively.

• the ANN architecture (multilayer normal feed • the learning paradigm (quick propagation);
forward); • the activation function (sigmoid-type);
• the number of hidden layers (two); • the monitored error (mean absolute error).
326 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333

Table 1
Plasma spray parameters

Parameter Value

Gun Sulzer-Metco F4, 6 mm diameter nozzle

Arc current (A) 350, 440, 530, 630, 750
Ar + H2 flow rate (SLPM) 0, 30, 40, 54, 60, 70
H2 /Ar flow rate ratio (%) 0, 13, 23, 33, 35, 43, 50
Carrier gas flow rate (SLPM) 2.2, 2.6, 3.2, 3.7, 4.2
Powder feed rate (kg h
1 ) 1.02, 1.32
Injector stand-off distance from the gun centerline axis (mm) 6, 7, 8
Feedstock injector internal diameter (mm) 1.5, 1.8
Spray distance (mm) 125
Spray angle (degr); angle between the substrate surface and the gun 90
centerline axis
Scanning step between two adjacent passes (mm) 12
Spray velocity (mm s
1 ) 16, 20
Substrate type 2017 aluminum base alloy, Ti–6Al–4V titanium base alloy,
2C22 low carbon steel

Values in bold characters belong to the reference condition.

Table 2
Deposition yield obtained for different processing parameter values

Run I [A] Ar + H2 H2 /Ar [%] CG [SLPM] ID [mm] Y [lm] rY [lm]

[SLPM]

A1 540 54 35 3.2 1.8 6.82 0.06

A2 350 54 35 3.2 1.8 4.08 0.12
A3 750 54 35 3.2 1.8 7.95 0.26
A4 530 60 50 3.2 1.8 6.18 0.06
A5 530 70 35 3.2 1.8 6.66 0.10
A6 530 70 23 3.2 1.8 2.82 0.03
A7 530 40 0 3.2 1.8 u.a. u.a.
A8 530 40 33 3.2 1.8 7.66 0.07
A9 530 54 35 2.2 1.8 4.35 0.05
A10 530 54 35 4.2 1.8 6.48 0.30
A11 440 30 35 2.6 1.5 7.61 0.09
A12 440 30 35 3.7 1.8 7.14 0.08
A13 440 60 35 2.6 1.8 4.84 0.02
A14 440 60 35 3.7 1.5 6.02 0.05
A15 440 40 13 2.6 1.8 3.69 0.05
A16 440 40 13 3.7 1.5 4.88 0.16
A17 440 40 43 2.6 1.5 7.79 0.03
A18 440 40 43 3.7 1.8 6.83 0.00
A19 630 30 35 2.6 1.8 7.35 0.19
A20 630 30 35 3.7 1.5 7.60 0.02
A21 630 60 35 2.6 1.5 6.17 0.14
A22 630 60 35 3.7 1.8 6.03 0.25
A23 630 40 13 2.6 1.5 5.73 0.06
A24 630 40 13 3.7 1.8 5.25 0.22
A25 630 40 43 2.6 1.8 7.21 0.13
A26 630 40 43 3.7 1.5 7.36 0.07

I: arc current intensity; Ar + H2 : total plasma gas flow rate; H2 /Ar: hydrogen fraction; CG: Argon carrier gas volume flow rate; ID:
feedstock injector internal diameter; Y , rY : deposition thickness rate and corresponding standard deviation; u.a.: unavailable.
 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333 327

Table 3
In-flight particle characteristics (average ± associated standard deviation) related to some processing parameters recorded by a bi-
chromatic analyzer (DPV 2000 analyzer, Technar, Ltd., QC, Canada)

Parameter Magnitude Velocity [m s
1 ] Temperaturea Diameter [lm] Flowb [parti- Radial positionc
[C] cle s
1 ] [mm]

Arc current [A] 350 222 ± 4d 2304 ± 22 52 ± 1 13 121 ± 3741 )9

530 267 ± 7 2566 ± 20 58 ± 2 12 449 ± 790 )47
750 298 ± 9 2618 ± 11 61 ± 1 15 220 ± 1584 )6.5
Total plasma flow 30 186 ± 1 2518 ± 2 59 ± 1 6491 ± 713 )13
rate [SLPM]–– 54 267 ± 7 2566 ± 20 58 ± 2 12 449 ± 790 )7
35% H2 /Ar 60 287 ± 4 2495 ± 18 58 ± 1 11 248 ± 1582 )10
Hydrogen frac- 0 211 ± 1 1757 ± 11 51 ± 1 3612 ± 64 )11
tion [%]––54 10 249 ± 2 2292 ± 13 47 ± 1 5879 ± 844 )10
Ar + H2 20 261 ± 3 2427 ± 11 54 ± 1 9643 ± 955 )9
35 267 ± 7 2566 ± 20 58 ± 2 12 449 ± 790 )7
Carrier gas flow 2.2 263 ± 10 2477 ± 18 51 ± 3 11 397 ± 1357 )4
rate [SLPM] 3.2 267 ± 7 2566 ± 20 58 ± 2 12 449 ± 790 )7
4.4 268 ± 4 2547 ± 23 60 ± 2 14 572 ± 1221 )13
Injector diameter 1.5 252 ± 3 2545 ± 15 60 ± 2 22 049 ± 1963 )11
[mm] 1.8 267 ± 7 2566 ± 20 58 ± 2 12 449 ± 790 )7
2.0 268 ± 4 2469 ± 13 54 ± 1 11 555 ± 203 )7
a
Tmelting ðAl2 O3 aÞ ¼ 2054 C; Tmelting ðTiO2 Þ ¼ 1857 C, Tvaporization ðAl2 O3 aÞ ¼ 2493 C; Tvaporization ðTiO2 Þ ¼ 3318 C.
b
Density of particles passing through the measurement volume per unit of time.
c
Position of the particle stream center on the axis perpendicular to the torch axis. Negative values relate to positions under the torch
axis.
d
Standard deviations relate to the count averages of the sampling times. Standard deviations of particle counts are much higher.

The training and the test procedures were
monitored together and a neuron penalty was
introduced to optimize the neuron number. For
that, the database was enlarged, based on the
standard deviation values, to obtain 160 new sets.
Several structures were trained in such a way,
taking into account a varying number of samples
in the training and test procedures (Fig. 7a). Re-
sults show that the optimization of the total neu-
ron number does obey to any rule. However, when
the number of output units is less than the number
of input units, the first hidden layer contained
more neurons than the second one. The resulting
optimal structure was 5_5_3_1.
5.4. ANN predictive results
ANN optimization permitted to relate the
processing parameters to the deposition yield (Y ).
Results concern single variations, i.e., the attribute
evolution is considered varying one processing
parameter, the other were kept to the reference
conditions. Results were compared to experimen-
tal sets that were not considered in the training or
in the test procedures (i.e., 6 cases from 24 exper-
imental sets were present in the ANN database
shown in Table 2).
5.4.1. Physical phenomena interpretation
Arc current intensity. The deposition yield pre-
sents a sigmoid-type evolution with the arc current
intensity (Fig. 8). As the arc current intensity in-
creases, the total and the net available energies in-
crease (i.e., the net available energy increases from
14.6 to 23.5 and to 29.3 kW for a current intensity
increasing from 350 to 530 and to 750 A, respec-
tively [64]). This leads to a better in-flight particle
molten state (i.e., particle temperature increase
according to Table 3) and hence to a higher prob-
ability for particles to better flatten (i.e., particle
328 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333

9 ANN (mean curve)

Deposition yield [µm.pass-1]

ANN (tolerance)
8 exprimental

3
300 400 500 600 700 800
Arc current intensity [A]

Fig. 8. Predicted deposition yield as a function of the arc cur-

rent intensity. The other parameters were kept unchanged to the
reference conditions.

Total plasma flow rate. The deposition yield

continuously decreases with the increase of the
total plasma gas flow rate (Fig. 9). As the total
volume increases, the particle average velocity
significantly increases, reducing in such a way their
interaction time with the plasma jet. This corre-
sponds to no significant change in particle tem-
perature.
H2 fraction. The deposition yield is significantly
correlated to variation of the hydrogen fraction
(Fig. 10). Hydrogen fraction induces in fact major
evolutions in the in-flight particle characteristics
(Table 3): an increase in the fraction induces sig-
nificant increases of particle average temperatures,
velocity and flow rate. These effects result mostly

9 ANN (mean curve)

Deposition yield [µm.pass-1]

ANN (tolerance)
Fig. 7. (a) Optimized number of neurons in the hidden layers as 8 experimental
a function of the trained samples. The other sets were submitted
to the test procedure. Each original set was enlarged ten times 7
considering the associated standard deviation (i.e., from A1 to
A18 sets). (b) Typical ANN structure optimization process by
6
neuron penalty showing the evolution of the average error (AE)
of training and test procedures. The optimal structure was
5_5_3_1 for 120 trained cases and 140 tested cases. 5

velocities increase according to Table 3). The 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

deposition yield reaches a plateau for the highest Total plasma gas volume [SLPM]
current levels due to the plasma jet temperature Fig. 9. Predicted deposition yield as a function of the total
increasing which in turn increases both the particle plasma gas flow rate. The other parameters were kept un-
vaporization ratio and the plasma jet viscosity. changed to the reference conditions.
 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333 329

9 However, when continuing to increase the gas flow

8 rate, higher injection velocities are obtained until
Deposition yield [µm.pass ]
-1

ANN (mean curve)

7
ANN (tolerance)
6 experimental
5 deposition yield.
4
3
2
1
0
-1
0 10 20
Hydrogen fraction [%]
Fig. 10. Predicted deposition yield as a function of the hydro-
gen fraction. The other parameters were kept unchanged to the
reference conditions.
from the plasma jet characteristics evolutions.
Increasing hydrogen ratio leads to [3,37]:
• an increase of the plasma enthalpy;
• an increase of its thermal conductivity;
• an increase of its velocity;
• a decrease of its viscosity.
Carrier gas flow rate. The deposition yield in-
creases with an increase of the feedstock carrier
gas flow rate, mostly because the particle injection
velocity is increased, drifting particles deeper into
the jet core (i.e., the radial position increases),
improving their velocity and temperature (Fig. 11).
the particle ratio crossing totally the plasma jet
becomes significant. This, in turn, decreases the
Feedstock injector internal diameter. It is not
obvious to discriminate significant effects on
deposition yield induced by a variation of the
feedstock injector internal diameter (Fig. 12). One
has to note whoever that the considered database
30 40 50 may not be representative, as only two diameters
were considered (i.e., 1.5 and 1.8 mm).
5.4.2. Statistical interpretation
In order to compare statistically the ANN and
the experimental results, several indexes were
considered. A scatter index (SI) was hence defined
as a measure of the discard between two results
that do not coincide anywhere in their variation
domain. A concordance index (CI) was defined
also as the complementary of the SI. Giving these
two definitions, the following relationship holds
between SI and CI for the whole observations:
SA þ CI ¼ 100% ð6Þ
The CI index was hence calculated for each
parameter–property couple to check the validity of
each correlation. Results concerned all the exper-
imental sets, i.e., those used in the training and test
procedures and those used to predict the property
evolutions (Table 4).

8
7.2
ANN (mean curve)
Deposition yield [µm.pass ]

Deposition yield [µm.pass -1]

-1

7 ANN (tolerance) 7.0

exerimental ANN(mean curve)
6 6.8 ANN(tolerance)
6.6 experiments
5
6.4
4 6.2

3 6.0

5.8
2
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
Carrier gas flow rate [SLPM] injector diameter [mm]

Fig. 11. Predicted deposition yield as a function of the carrier Fig. 12. Predicted deposition yield as a function of the injector
gas flow rate. The other parameters were kept unchanged to the diameter. The other parameters were kept unchanged to the
reference conditions. reference conditions.
330 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333
Table 4
CI for the ANN results
Set Parameter
I [A] Ar + H2 [SLPM]
Predicted 80% 60%
Set Trained Tested
CI 100% 29%c
a
Two experiments.
b
All results related to the five considered parameters were added in the statistics.
c
50% within 2  r.
Results show in such a way that unknown sets
submitted to the optimized ANN structure were
predicted globally to 71%. 100% of the trained sets
were recognized by the ANN structure, showing
no opposition in the trained cases. The test pro-
cedure sets gave the lowest CI, as only two original
cases of 1.5 mm diameter injector size were
planned in the training procedure. Such results
are considered in a first approximation as satis-
factory.
6. Conclusions
This work aimed at introducing a robust sta-
tistical method of parameter optimization and a
predictive tool offering facilities to process very
large data, namely ANNs. This methodology was
applied successfully to the atmospheric plasma
spray (APS) process. It is considered as a complex
problem with parameter interdependencies and
property correlations. A database based on
experimental sets was realized to train ANN
structures and check the validity of the ANN
methodology. Predictive results showed good
agreement with experimental sets realized after
having generalizing the ANN structures. More-
over, global tendencies of the predictive curves
were identified and explained physically, based
especially on diagnostic in situ measurements.
Acknowledgements
Authors gratefully thank F. Pandrak for his
valuable help in the sample machining.
H2 /Ar [SLPM] CG [SLPM] ID [mm]
57% 80% 100%a
Predictedb
71%
Authors recognize the very valuable help of
P. Gougeon in the particle diagnostics.
LERMPS is a member of the Institut des
Traitements de Surface de Franche-Comt
e
(ITSFC, Surface Treatment Institute of Franche-
Comt
e), France.
References
[1] P. Fauchais, J.F. Coudert, B. Pateyron, La production des
plasmas thermique, Rev. G
en. Therm. 35 (1996) 543 (in
French).
[2] P. Fauchais, M. Vardelle, Plasma spraying: present and
future, Pure Appl. Chem. 66 (1994) 1247.
[3] E. Pfender, Fundamental studies associated with the
plasma spray process, Surf. Coat. Technol. 34 (1988) 1.
[4] J. Edward, Jr. Kubel, Thermal spraying technology: from
art to science, Adv. Mater. Processes (1987) 69.
[5] S. Keller, P. Tommer, R. Clarke, A.R. Nicoll, Key factors
in the development of plasma spray systems and the spray
processes, in: A. Ohmori (Ed.), Current Status and Future
Trends, High Temperature Society of Japan, Osaka, Japan,
1995, p. 275.
[6] T. Stoltenhoff, J. Voyer, H. Kreye, Cold spraying––state of
the art and applicability, in: E.F. Lugscheider (Ed.),
International Thermal Spray Conference 2002, DVS-
Verlag GmbH, D€ usseldorf, Germany, 2002, p. 366.
[7] A. Ohmori, K. Kamada, Laser processing of plasma
sprayed coating, Trans. JWRL 18 (2) (1989).
[8] M.J. Mayo, R.W. Siegel, A. Narayanasamy, W.D. Nix,
Mechanical properties of nanophase TiO2 as determined
by nanoindentation, J. Mater. Res. 5 (1990) 1079.
[9] S. Fantassi, M. Vardelle, P. Fauchais, C. Moreau, Inves-
tigation of the splat formation versus different particulate
temperatures and velocities prior impact, in: C.C. Berndt
(Ed.), Thermal Spray: Advances in Coatings Technology,
ASM International, Materials Park, OH, USA, 1992,
p. 755.
[10] L. Leblanc, P. Gougeon, C. Moreau, Investigation of the
long-term stability of plasma spraying by monitoring
 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333
characteristics of the sprayed particles, in: C.C. Berndt
(Ed.), Thermal Spray: A United Forum for Scientific and
Technological Advance, ASM International, Materials
Park, OH, USA, 1997, p. 567.
[11] J.F. Bisson, B. Gauthier, C. Moreau, Effect of plasma
fluctuations on in-flight particle parameters, in: C.C.
Berndt, K.A. Khor, E.F. Lugscheider (Eds.), New Surfaces
for a New Millennium, ASM International, Materials
Park, OH, USA, 2001, p. 715.
[12] K.A. Gross, Noise emissions in thermal spray operations,
J. Thermal Spray Technol. 11 (2002) 350.
[13] S. Das, V.K. Suri, U. Chandra, K. Sampath, One-
dimensional mathematical model for selecting plasma
spray process parameters, J. Thermal Spray Technol. 4
(1995) 153.
[14] M. Lynn, S. Lynn, D.J. Varacalle, W.L. Riggs, An
experimental/analytical investigation of plasma-sprayed
alumina coatings, in: C.C. Berndt, T.F. Bernecki (Eds.),
Thermal Spray: Research and Applications, ASM Inter-
national, Materials Park, OH, USA, 1993, p. 315.
[15] H. Fukanuma, Mathematical modelling of flattening
process on rough surfaces in thermal spray, in: C.C.
Berndt (Ed.), Thermal Spray: Practical Solutions for
Engineering Problems, ASM International, Materials
Park, OH, USA, 1996, p. 647.
[16] C.J. Einerson, D.E. Clarck, B.A. Detering, P.L. Taylor,
Intelligent control strategies for the plasma spray process,
in: C.C. Berndt, T.F. Bernecki (Eds.), Thermal Spray
Coatings: Research, Design and Applications, ASM Inter-
national, Materials Park, OH, USA, 1993, p. 205.
[17] T.J. Zappia, D. Harvey, C. Madden, A. Matteson,
Fuzzy logic and spray forming process, SPIE 2061 (1993)
504.
[18] S.L. Chen, P. Sitonen, P. Kettunen, Experimental design
and parameter optimization for plasma spraying of
alumina coatings, in: C.C. Berndt (Ed.), Thermal Spray:
Advances in Coatings Technology, ASM International,
Materials Park, OH, USA, 1992, p. 51.
[19] M. Pasandideh-Fard, V. Pershin, S. Chandra, J. Mostagh-
imi, Splat shapes in a thermal spray coating process:
simulations and experiments, J. Thermal Spray Technol. 11
(2002) 206.
[20] V.V. Sobolev, J.M. Guilemany, Influence of wetting and
surface effects on splat formation during thermal spraying,
Mater. Lett. 37 (1998) 132.
[21] G. Montavon, S. Sampath, C.C. Berndt, H. Herman, C.
Coddet, Effects of the substrate nature on the splat
morphology of vaccum plasma sprayed deposits, in: A.
Ohmori (Ed.), Current Status and Future Trends, High
Temperature Society of Japan, Osaka, Japan, 1995, p. 333.
[22] M. Pasandideh-Fard, J. Mostaghimi, On the spreading and
solidification of molten particles in a plasma spray process:
effect of thermal contact resistance, Plasma Chem. Plasma
Process. 16 (1996) 83S.
[23] P. Fauchais, M. Vardelle, A. Vardelle, L. Bianchi, Plasma
spray: study of the coating generation, Ceram. Int. 22
(1996) 295.
331
[24] P.C. Huang, J. Heberlein, E. Pfender, Particle behavior in
two-fluid turbulent plasma jet, Surf. Coat. Technol. 73
(1995) 142.
[25] R.H. Henne, E. Bouyer, V. Borck, G. Schiller, Influence of
anode nozzle and external torch contour on the quality of
the atmospheric DC plasma spray process, in: C.C. Berndt,
K.A. Khor, E.F. Lugscheider (Eds.), New Surfaces for a
New Millennium, ASM International, Materials Park, OH,
USA, 2001, p. 471.
[26] K. Sakaki, N. Huruhashi, K. Tamaki, Y. Shimizu, Effect
of nozzle geometry on cold spray process, in: E.F.
Lugscheider (Ed.), International Thermal Spray Confer-
ence 2002, DVS-Verlag GmbH, D€ usseldorf, Germany,
2002, p. 385.
[27] R. Westhoff, G. Trapaga, J. Szekely, Plasma–particle
interactions in plasma spraying systems, Metall. Trans.
23B (1992) 683.
[28] M. Vardelle, A. Vardelle, P. Fauchais, M.I. Boulos,
Plasma-particle momentum and heat transfer: modelling
and measurements, AIChE (1983) 236.
[29] Fr.-W. Bach, R. Hennne, V. Borch, K. Landes, T. Streibl,
E. Lugscheider, A. Fischer, K. Seemann, T. Copitzky, J.
Prehm, Process diagnostics at thermal spraying processes-
new experiments from current projects of the DFG-
sponsored research group, in: E.F. Lugscheider (Ed.),
International Thermal Spray Conference 2002, DVS-
Verlag GmbH, D€ usseldorf, Germany, 2002, p. 78.
[30] H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia, Neural networks in materials sci-
ence, ISIJ Int. 1999 39 (1999) 966.
[31] S. Guessasma, G. Montavon, C. Coddet, On the neural
network concept to describe the thermal spray deposition
process: an introduction, in: E.F. Lugscheider (Ed.),
International Thermal Spray Conference 2002, DVS-
Verlag GmbH, D€ usseldorf, Germany, 2002, p. 435.
[32] S. Guessasma, G. Montavon, C. Coddet, On the imple-
mentation of neural network concept to optimize thermal
spray process, in: I. Takeuchi, C. Buelens, H. Koinuma,
E.J. Amis, J.M. Newsam, L.T. Wille (Eds.), Combinatorial
and Artificial Intelligence Methods in Materials Science,
Materials Research Society, Warrendale, PA, USA, 2001,
p. S8.2.
[33] S. Malinov, W. Sha, J.J. McKeown, Modelling the
correlation between processing parameters and properties
in titanium alloys using artificial neural network, Comput.
Mater. Sci. 21 (2001) 375.
[34] M.M. Nelson, W.T. Illingworth, A Practical Guide to
Neural Nets, third ed., Addison-Wesley Publishing, New
York, NY, USA, 1991.
[35] B. Normand, V. Fervel, C. Coddet, V. Nikitine, Tribolog-
ical properties of plasma sprayed alumina–titania coatings:
role and control of the microstructure, Surf. Coat. Tech-
nol. 123 (2000) 278.
[36] K. Ramachandran, V. Selvarajan, P.V. Ananthapadma-
nabhan, K.P. Streekumar, N. Ananthaseshan, Character-
ization of Al2 O3 , Al2 O3 + TiO2 powder mixture and
coatings prepared by plasma spraying, Mater. Manuf.
Processes 12 (1997) 863.
332 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333
[37] P. Fauchais, J.F. Coudert, A. Vardelle, M. Vardelle, A.
Grimaud, P. Roumilhac, State of the art for the under-
standing of the physical phenomena involved in plasma
spraying at atmospheric pressure, in: D.L. Houck (Ed.),
Thermal Spray: Advances in Coatings Technology, ASM
International, Materials Park, OH, USA, 1987, p. 11.
[38] A. Vaidya, G. Bancke, S. Sampath, H. Herman, Influence
of process variables on the plasma sprayed coatings: an
integrated study, in: C.C. Berndt, K.A. Khor, E.F.
Lugscheider (Eds.), New Surfaces for a New Millennium,
ASM International, Materials Park, OH, USA, 2001,
p. 1345.
[39] I.A. Fisher, Variables influencing the characteristics of
plasma-sprayed coatings, Int. Metall. Rev. (1972) 117.
[40] M.F. Smith, R.A. Neister, R.C. Dykhuizen, An investiga-
tion of the effects of droplet impact angle in thermal spray
deposition, in: C.C. Berndt, S. Sampath (Eds.), Thermal
Spray Industrial Applications, ASM International, Mate-
rials Park, OH, USA, 1994, p. 603.
[41] J. Ilavsky, A.J. Allen, G. Gabrielle, G. Long, S. Krueger,
Influence of spray angle on the pore and crack microstruc-
ture of plasma-sprayed deposits, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 80
(1997) 733.
[42] M. Mellali, P. Fauchais, A. Grimaud, Influence of
substrate roughness and temperature on the adhesion/
cohesion of alumina coatings, Surf. Coat. Technol. 81
(1996) 275.
[43] N.Z. Mehdizadeh, S. Chandra, J. Mostaghimi, Effect of
substrate temperature and roughness on coating forma-
tion, in: E.F. Lugscheider (Ed.), International Thermal
Spray Conference 2002, DVS-Verlag GmbH, D€ u sseldorf,
Germany, 2002, p. 830.
[44] C. Moreau, P. Gougeon, M. Lamontagne, V. Lacasse, G.
Vaudreuil, P. Cielo, On-line control of the plasma spraying
process by monitoring the temperature, velocity and
trajectory of in-flight particles, in: C.C. Berndt, S. Sampath
(Eds.), Thermal Spray Industrial Applications, ASM
International, Materials Park, OH, USA, 1994, p. 431.
[45] R. Kingswell, K.T. Scott, L.L. Wassell, Optimizing the
vacuum plasma spray deposition of metal, ceramic and
cermet coatings using designed experiments, J. Thermal
Spray Technol. 2 (1993) 179.
[46] G. Montavon, C. Coddet, C.C. Berndt, S.H. Leigh,
Microstructural index to quantify thermal spray deposit
microstructures using image analysis, J. Thermal Spray
Technol. 7 (1998) 229.
[47] C.-J. Li, A. Ohmori, Relationship between the microstruc-
ture and properties of thermally sprayed deposits,
J. Thermal Spray Technol. 11 (2002) 365.
[48] A.J. Allen, J. Ilavsky, G.G. Long, J.S. Wallace, C.C.
Berndt, H. Herman, Microstructural characterization of
yittria-stabilized zirconia plasma sprayed deposits using
multiple small-angle neutron scattering, Acta Mater. 49
(2001) 1661.
[49] T. Keller, W. Wagner, J. Ilavsky, A.J. Allen, N. Marga-
dant, S. Siegmann, G. Barbezat, J. Pisacka, R. Enzl,
Volumetric and size characterization of void morphologies
in thermally sprayed mettalic deposits using scattering
techniques, in: E.F. Lugscheider (Ed.), International
Thermal Spray Conference 2002, DVS-Verlag GmbH,
D€usseldorf, Germany, 2002, p. 91.
[50] L. Bianchi, N. Llorca-Isern, G. Bertran, Microstructural
evaluation of plasma sprayed coatings using fractal char-
acterization, in: C.C. Berndt, K.A. Khor, E.F. Lugscheider
(Eds.), New Surfaces for a New Millennium, ASM
International, Materials Park, OH, USA, 2001, p. 967.
[51] I. Hofinger, K. Raab, J. M€ oller, M. Bobeth, Effect of
substrate surface roughness on the adherence of NiCrAlY
thermal spray coatings, J. Thermal Spray Technol. 11
(2002) 387.
[52] ISO 4287:1997; Geometrical product specifications
(GPS)––surface texture: profile method––terms, definitions
and surface texture parameters, replaces ISO 4287-1:1984.
[53] E. Hornbogen, Fractals in microstructures, Int. Mater.
Rev. 34 (1989) 277.
[54] C.K. Lin, C.C. Berndt, Measurement and analysis of
adhesion strength for thermally sprayed coatings, J.
Thermal Spray Technol. 3 (1994) 75.
[55] C. Richard, Etude des caract
eristiques m
ecaniques de
rev^etements projet
es par proc
ed
es thermiques, Ph.D. The-
sis, Universit
e de Technologie de Compiegne, Compiegne,
France, 1992 (in French).
[56] S.H. Leigh, C.C. Berndt, A test for coating adhesion on flat
substrate––a technical note, J. Thermal Spray Technol. 3
(1994) 183.
[57] ASTM C633-79, Standard test method for adhesion or
cohesion strength of flame sprayed coatings, American
Society for Testing and Materials, 1979.
[58] P. Laval, E. Felder, Caract
erisation de lÕadh
erence des
rev^etements par indentation normale: une revue biblio-
graphique, Mat. Tech. (1993) 93 (in French).
[59] S. Kuroda, T. Fukushima, S. Kitahara, Significance of the
quenching stress in the cohesion and adhesion of thermally
sprayed coatings, in: C.C. Berndt (Ed.), Thermal Spray:
Advances in Coatings Technology, ASM International,
Materials Park, OH, USA, 1992, p. 903.
[60] S.C. Gill, Residual stresses in plasma sprayed deposits,
Ph.D. Thesis, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK,
1991.
[61] G. Qian, T. Nakamura, C.C. Berndt, Effect of thermal
gradient and residual stresses on thermal barrier coating
fracture, Mech. Mater. 27 (1998) 91.
[62] T.W. Clyne, S.C. Gill, Residual stresses in thermal spray
coatings and their effect on interfacial adhesion: a review
of recent work, J. Thermal Spray Technol. 5 (1996) 401.
[63] R. McPherson, P. Cheang, Elastic anisotropy of APS
alumina coatings and its relationship to microstructure,
High Perform. Ceram. Films Coat. (1991) 277.
[64] S. Guessasma, G. Montavon, P. Gougeon, C. Coddet, On
the neural network concept to describe the thermal spray
deposition process: correlation between in-flight particles
characteristics and processing parameters, in: E.F. Lugsche-
ider (Ed.), International Thermal Spray Conference 2002,
DVS-Verlag GmbH, D€ usseldorf, Germany, 2002, p. 453.
 S. Guessasma et al. / Computational Materials Science 29 (2004) 315–333
[65] P.J. Werbos, Generalization of back propagation with
application to recurrent gas market model, Neural Net-
works 1 (1988) 339.
[66] D.B. Parker, Artificial neural networks, an overview,
Andrew SeyboldÕs Profess. Comput. 6 (10) (1988).
[67] D.O Hebbs, The Organization of Behavior, Wiely and
Sons, New York, NY, USA, 1949.
[68] B. Windrow, M.E. Hoff, Adaptative switching circuits,
IRE Wescon Conv. Rec. (Part 4) (1960) 96.
333
[69] T. Kohonen, Self-Organization and Associative Memory,
Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, USA, 1984.
[70] S.E. Fahlman, Faster-learning variations on back-propa-
gation: an empirical study, in: D. Touretzky, G.E. Hinton,
T.J. Sejnowski (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1988 Connec-
tionist Models Summer School, Morgan Kaufmann,
San Mateo, CA, USA, 1988, p. 38.
[71] D. Patterson, Artificial Neural Networks, Prentice Hall,
New York, NY, USA, 1996.