Conference conclusions point the way forward in thermal spraying

Citation

(1998), "Conference conclusions point the way forward in thermal spraying", Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology, Vol. 70 No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1108/aeat.1998.12770bac.002

Conference conclusions point the way forward in thermal spraying

Conference conclusions point the way forward in thermal spraying

"Communication between universities, industry, equipment and materials suppliers and the technology providers needs to be improved." This was one of several conclusions which came out of a one-day conference on thermal spraying, sponsored by Sulzer Metco (UK) of Farnborough, and held at the Mardott Breadsall Priory at Morley, near Derby.

The conference was attended by some 30 delegates, drawn mainly from universities and research associations in the UK. The theme of the conference arose from the supposition that thermal spraying is a process with a potential that has never been realised. The speakers included Brian Cantor, Oxford University; David Wimpenny, Warwick University; and David Bettridge, Rolls-Royce plc, Derby.

They described what they saw as the present and future applications of this fast moving technology. However, the main interest arose when the delegates split up into small groups to discuss particular questions that had been posed by the main speakers. These included "what does industry expect from the research community?" and conversely, "what does the research community expect from industry?" The answers to the first question included new and better materials, partnerships, a bringing-together of ideas, a more equal standing and the need to learn of ideas for new products more quickly. On the other hand, the research community wanted to have a greater knowledge of industry's needs, a closer more frequent involvement and, of course, more funding.

In answer to the question "how can the research community, industry and suppliers work closer to realise the potential?", one group proposed that a new focused organisation should be set up to represent thermal spraying and to bring together various groups from each side to work in partnership on identified research requirements and find funds for them.

The final question was "who pays?". It was felt on all sides that the answer to this lay in industry's court as it controls the release of funds from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council. It was agreed that universities had a lot to offer and industry should be made aware of their importance.

In summary the delegates felt that this had been a most valuable exercise and many of the problems and some of the solutions had been identified in principle, although these remained to be put into practice. The sponsors, Sulzer Metco, felt that the conference had made a contribution to realising the potential of the thermal spray industry and they planned to sponsor similar events with other groups. Since the seminar, Sulzer Metco has also pursued further the question of who would be prepared to participate in one body representing all interests in thermal spraying?