4.7 Article

Influence of HVOF parameters on HAp coating generation: An integrated approach using process maps

Journal

SURFACE & COATINGS TECHNOLOGY
Volume 358, Issue -, Pages 299-307

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.surfcoat.2018.11.029

Keywords

HAp coatings; HVOF; Process maps; Design of experiments; In vitro behavior

Funding

  1. CONACYT [272095, 279738, 293429]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An experimental approach based on design of experiments, process maps and the analysis of deposition first stages to improve the biocompatibility of High-Velocity Oxygen Fuel (HVOF) hydroxyapatite (HAp) coatings is here presented. A two-level design of three factors (2(3)) was performed using the stand-off distance (SOD), the fuel-oxygen ratio (F/O) and the powder feed rate (PFR). The effect of these experimental factors on the first stages of the coating formation was investigated to study the physical state of the particles before and after impacting the substrate. This study allowed the selection of the most suitable deposition parameter combinations to obtain HAp coatings with optimal crystallinity (> 45%), Ca/P ratio (approx. 1.67), phase content (> 95% of HAp), which guarantee the coatings mechanical stability and biocompatibility. The behavior of the coating within simulated body fluid (SBF) and cell culture (hFOB) was studied to analyze the apatite layer formation and the extracts cytotoxicity on human osteoblasts, respectively. The results show that the F/O ratio is the most influential factor on temperature and velocity on the in-flight particles and therefore on the coating properties. The SBF results confirmed the formation of an apatite layer after 14 days of immersion. Finally, the mitochondrial activity, measured by the MTS assay, and cell membrane integrity measured by LDH liberation assays, show that the coating released material does not induce toxicity on the exposed cells.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available