thesis/dissertation/report.org

Preamble   ignore_heading

Fundamental Setup (Encoding, Fonts, Language)   ignore_heading

Page Layout & Geometry   ignore_heading

Mathematics   ignore_heading

Graphics, Figures, and Floats   ignore_heading

Tables   ignore_heading

Captions & Typography   ignore_heading

Document Structure & References   ignore_heading

Hyperlinks (LOAD LAST)   ignore_heading

#

Frontmatter   ignore_heading

COMMENT How to write a Keyword list

• Abrasive wear
• Cobalt based alloys
• Fatigue;
• HIPing;
• Stellite 1

COMMENT How to write an Abstract   ignore ignore_heading

Readers use an abstract to rapidly assess a paper's relevance, particularly when reviewing numerous search results. A successful abstract persuades its target audience to read the full paper, and the gold standard is one so clear that its message can be grasped even by a sleep-deprived, over-caffeinated brain. This level of informative clarity is achieved through a highly structured, concise, and perhaps unapologetically formulaic composition, reserving any literary flair for the paper itself.

Abstracts are quite limited in word length (submition guidelines limit it to 200 words) and the below checklist/structure is suggested as a template.

• One or two sentences providing a basic introduction to the field, comprehensible to a scientist in any discipline
• Two or three sentences of more detailed background, comprehensible to scientists in related disciplines
• One sentence clearly stating the general problem being addressed by the particular study.
• One sentence summarizing the main results (with the words "here we show" or their equivalent).
• Two or three sentences explaining what the main results reveals in direct comparison to what was thought to be the case previously, or how the main result adds to previous knowledge
• One of more sentences to put the results into a more general context

One or two sentences providing a basic introduction to the field, comprehensible to a scientist in any discipline   ignore ignore_heading

Developing materials that can withstand extreme wear and degradation is a central challenge in materials science, with profound implications for the longevity and reliability of critical industrial components. High-performance alloys are essential for manufacturing parts that operate under such aggressive conditions.

The performance and reliability of components in demanding industrial environments depend critically on the materials from which they are made. A material's ultimate properties are not solely determined by its chemical composition but are profoundly influenced by its manufacturing process.

The operational lifespan of critical components in industries from aerospace to energy is often limited by material wear and failure.

Consequently, the development of robust, wear-resistant materials is paramount, where the manufacturing process itself plays a decisive role in defining final performance.

The development of materials capable of withstanding severe mechanical wear and stress is fundamental to advancing technology in critical sectors like energy and manufacturing.

A material's resilience is not dictated by its composition alone but is critically shaped by its microstructural architecture, which is controlled by the manufacturing process.

Two or three sentences of more detailed background, comprehensible to scientists in related disciplines   ignore ignore_heading

Cobalt-based Stellite alloys, renowned for their exceptional hardness and corrosion resistance, are a cornerstone material for these applications. These alloys are often produced via powder metallurgy consolidated by Hot Isostatic Pressing (HIP), a process that subjects the material to high temperature and isostatic pressure to reduce porosity and enhance mechanical properties.

Cobalt-based alloys, such as the Stellite family, are widely used for their exceptional resistance to wear and corrosion due to a hard carbide phase embedded within a tough cobalt matrix. Traditionally, these alloys are produced by casting, a process that is cost-effective but often results in a coarse, brittle microstructure. An alternative route is powder consolidation via Hot Isostatic Pressing (HIPing), which can produce finer, more homogeneous structures.

Cobalt-based Stellite alloys are a primary choice for these applications, deriving their properties from a microstructure of hard carbide particles in a ductile cobalt-chromium matrix. Stellite 6 (Co–28Cr–4.5W–1C), a widely used variant, is typically produced by casting, which yields a coarse and brittle carbide network. Powder metallurgy combined with Hot Isostatic Pressing (HIPing) offers an alternative route to produce a more refined and homogeneous microstructure.

Cobalt-based alloys, particularly the Stellite family, are benchmark materials for such applications, prized for the high hardness imparted by a network of chromium and tungsten carbides. Conventionally produced by casting, these alloys often suffer from brittleness due to a coarse carbide structure. An alternative route, Hot Isostatic Pressing (HIPing) of pre-alloyed powder, can produce a more refined microstructure.

One sentence clearly stating the general problem being addressed by the particular study.   ignore ignore_heading

However it remains a critical question whether the microstructural refinement achieved through HIPing enhances toughness and fatigue resistance in high-carbon alloys like Stellite 1, particularly in the context of cavitation erosion.

However, while the benefits of a single HIP cycle are well-established, the potential for further microstructural and mechanical property enhancement through a subsequent 're-HIPing' treatment has remained largely unexplored.

However, for high-carbon alloys designed for severe wear, it has been unclear whether the microstructural refinement from HIPing could enhance toughness without compromising the wear performance endowed by the coarse carbide structure of cast products.

However, it remains poorly understood how the microstructural refinement from HIPing affects the intricate balance between hardness, impact toughness, and contact fatigue resistance in medium-carbon alloys like Stellite 6.

However, it has remained a critical question whether the microstructural refinement achieved through HIPing can enhance toughness without significantly compromising the excellent wear resistance conferred by the coarse carbides in their cast counterparts.

One sentence summarizing the main results (with the words "here we show" or their equivalent).   ignore ignore_heading

Here we show, by directly comparing a cast and a HIPed cobalt alloy (Co–30Cr–12W–2.5C by wt %), that the HIPing route produces a material with superior cavitation erosion and order of magnitude greater corrosion resistance to its cast counterpart.

Here we show that subjecting HIP-consolidated Stellite 4, 6, and 20 alloys to a second re-HIPing cycle induces significant carbide coarsening and matrix strengthening, leading to concurrent improvements in hardness, indentation modulus, and wear resistance.

Here we show, by directly comparing a cast and a HIPed cobalt alloy (Co–33Cr–17.5W–2.5C by wt %), that the HIPing route produces a material with an order-of-magnitude greater impact resistance and superior contact fatigue performance, all while maintaining equivalent hardness and wear resistance to its cast counterpart.

Here we show that while HIPing significantly enhances the impact toughness and contact fatigue of Stellite 6 compared to its cast counterpart, the fatigue resistance does not scale with toughness and is instead dominated by the alloy's intrinsically lower hardness and carbide volume fraction.

Here we show that for a Co−30Cr−14W−1C alloy, the HIPing process yields a material with substantially improved impact toughness and contact fatigue performance while largely preserving the high hardness and suffering only a slight reduction in abrasive wear resistance compared to the cast version.

TODO Two or three sentences explaining what the main results reveals in direct comparison to what was thought to be the case previously, or how the main result adds to previous knowledge   ignore ignore_heading

This research reveals that the refined microstructure of alloys processed via Hot Isostatic Pressing (HIP) successfully mitigates the classic trade-off between wear resistance and toughness. The fine, discrete carbides in the HIPed structure resist the catastrophic brittle fracture that plagues the coarse carbide networks found in conventionally cast materials. This fundamentally alters the dominant failure mechanism from carbide fracture to more ductile modes like matrix ploughing and carbide pull-out, enhancing energy absorption and dramatically improving impact properties.

These findings demonstrate that re-HIPing is not merely a densification process but acts as an effective thermal treatment for tuning the alloy's microstructure. The observed solid solution strengthening of the cobalt matrix, coupled with the coarsening of the strengthening carbide phases, provides a clear microstructural basis for the enhanced tribomechanical performance.

This result directly challenges the assumption that achieving maximum wear resistance in this class of alloy necessitates a trade-off with toughness. We reveal that the refined carbide morphology in the HIPed alloy fundamentally alters the dominant failure mechanism from brittle carbide fracture to matrix ploughing and carbide pull-out, which explains the dramatic improvement in impact properties.

This finding reveals a complex and non-linear interdependency of tribological properties, challenging the common design principle that a substantial increase in toughness should directly translate to superior fatigue performance. In contrast to high-carbide alloys like Stellite 20, our results demonstrate that in medium-carbide systems, bulk hardness can be the limiting factor for contact fatigue, even in a microstructure optimized for impact resistance.

This outcome demonstrates a successful mitigation of the classic wear-resistance-versus-toughness trade-off. The fine, discrete carbides in the HIPed microstructure resist the catastrophic fracture that plagues the coarse carbide networks in the cast alloy, thereby providing a mechanism for enhanced energy absorption and fatigue life.

TODO One of more sentences to put the results into a more general context   ignore ignore_heading

These findings show that HIPing is a viable processing strategy for creating components that are simultaneously hard and tough, moving beyond the classic trade-off between wear resistance and toughness,

s a key design parameter for engineering superior materials. This approach allows for creating components that are simultaneously hard and tough, optimizing service life in applications requiring both wear and impact resistance.

Our results establish re-HIPing as a viable and straightforward post-processing strategy to further optimize the service life and performance of cobalt-based components, offering a pathway to creating more durable materials for demanding engineering applications.

These findings establish that the choice of processing route is a critical tool for engineering superior material properties, enabling the design of next-generation components that are simultaneously ultra-hard and exceptionally tough for high-stress applications.

These results provide critical insight for tailoring material processing routes for specific engineering applications, highlighting that a holistic approach—considering the complex interplay between multiple mechanical properties—is necessary to design the next generation of high-performance materials.

Our results provide a clear processing strategy for engineering cobalt-based alloys with a more versatile combination of properties, enabling their use in higher-stress applications where resistance to both steady wear and mechanical shock is required.

COMMENT General Style Guide

The ‘dissertation’ is in the form of a journal paper:  Do not need detailed literature review (already done in B81EZ or include in work report).  Work Report allows more detail to be included (there is an analogy of this for journals BTW).  More contemporary for engineering disciplines and the workplace.

Section	Word count	Figures	Tables
Introduction and Literature Review	1500	2	0
Apparatus and Methods	1500	3	2
Results	1000 – 1500	5	0
Discussion and Conclusions	1000 - 1500	0	1
Conclusions and Future work	500	0	1
Total	6000	10	4

References 25 - 35. HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAH

Introduction

The microstrucuture of stellite alloys consists of a cobalt-chromium solid solution and mixed carbides composed of a metal radical and carbon as listed in \ref{tab:stellite_carbides}.

\cite{nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010} \cite{nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010}

\begin{table} \protect\caption{Mixed carbides present in Stellite alloys\label{tab:stellite_carbides}} \begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|} \toprule Carbide & Comment & Citation \\ \midrule ${M}_{3}{C}_{2}$ & Chromium carbide which forms at low Cr/C ratio & \cite{nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010} \\ ${M}_{7}{C}_{3}$ & Chromium content carbide which forms at a slightly higher Cr/C ratio & \cite{nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010} \\ ${M}_{23}{C}_{6}$ & Chromium content carbide which forms at an higher Cr/C ratio & \cite{nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010} \\ \hline ${M}_6{C}$ & refractory metal carbide & \cite{nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010} \\ ${M}{C}$ & refractory metal carbide & \cite{nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010} \\ \bottomrule \end{tabular} \end{table}

In cobalt-based and iron-based hardfacing alloys, mixed carbides present in the microstructure are composed of a metal radical and carbon for example M7C3, M23C6, M3C2 and MC In hardfacings with a fine microstructure the carbides may be too small to have their corrosion behaviour determined as they are formed in small quantities surrounded by the matrix phase. [27, 28]. The pure commercial versions of these carbides Cr3C2, Cr7C3, Cr23C6, Mo2C, NbC and TiC manufactured by sintering are too brittle to be used as hardfacings however, their large size will enable the corrosion behaviour to be evaluated.

COMMENT Draft

The microstructure of Stellite alloys varies considerably with composition. They may either be in the form of hypoeutectic structure consisting of primary dendrites of a cobalt-rich solid solution surrounded by eutectic carbides, or of hypereutectic type containing large idiomorphic primary chromium rich carbides and eutectic. nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010 Among the alloying elements, carbon is found to have a large influence on the microstructure, causing a change from a hypoeutectic to hypereutectic alloy. Figure 2 shows the phase diagram for the carbon–cobalt alloy system. As can be seen in the hypoeutectic side of the system (<1.6at% of C) the liquidus temperature of the alloy decreases by 14 C for each 1% increase in carbon content. Carbon is clearly critical to those casting alloys formulated for the highest creep rupture strength levels, since carbide strengthening is the primary precipitation hardening mechanism utilized in the cobalt alloy system. The control of carbon is critical for tensile and rupture strength and ductility since it has been shown that a nonlinear increase in strength occurs over a range of 0.3–0.6% carbon. The strength of most cobalt base superalloys is derived from the carbide phases present in the matrix and distributed around the grain boundaries. The carbides that form depend on the composition and thermal history of the material. The carbide former elements are from group IV (Ti, Zr, Hf), group V (Cb, Ta), and group VI (Cr, Mo, W). The types of carbides that are formed are as follows (M and C represents metal and carbon atoms respectively): nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010

M3C2: rhombic, a high chromium content carbide which forms at low Cr/C ratio; nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010 M7C3: trigonal, a high chromium content carbide which forms at a slightly higher Cr/C ratio; nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010 M23C6: cubic, a high chromium content carbide which forms at an higher Cr/C ratio, when the Cr is greater than 5 wt% of the alloy; nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010 M6C: complex cubic, a carbide phase whose volume fraction increases as refractory metals are introduced; nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010 MC: fcc NaCl structure, a carbide comprising metal groups IV and VI. nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010

These carbides are listed above in the order of increasing stability, or free energy of formation. The stronger the carbide formers used, the greater is the tendency to form M6C and MC carbides. The type of carbides that form is dependent upon both thermal history and composition. nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010

The microstructure of cobalt base superalloys is thus a combination of MC, M7C3, M23C6, and M6C carbides. In the cast structures, both composition and shape help to distinguish one carbide from another. The MC carbides have two characteristic shapes, a Chinese script and a block-like angular particles. The differences are believed to be the result of formation at various times during solidification. Block-like angular MC carbides may form initially before the bulk of the melt has started to solidify, whereas in the Chinese script, MC carbide is formed within the eutectic composition. nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010

M23C6 carbides are found mostly as fine plates interlayered with the cobalt matrix. This eutectic structure has a block-like shape. Subsequent heating of the cast structure can dissolve the M23C6 carbides. Upon aging, the carbides are precipitated as fine particles, usually near the eutectic M23C6 islands. In contrast to other carbides, the M6C carbides do not have a characteristic morphology. Other important microstructural features of cobalt base superalloys are stacking faults, which have been reported to be present on all {111} planes.8 Stacking faults appear to be related to the tendency to form hcp. Since stacking faults in fcc materials have an hcp structure, this is not surprising. nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010

What is HIPing? Hot isostatic pressing (HIP) is a much newer technique, and its use to provide a wear-resistant surface is even more novel. In normal use, the technique can be employed to promotepowder consolidation, diffusion bonding, and the healing of casting defects. As used to produce a diffusionbonded coating, it has none of the deleterious effects of welding, which include unhomogeneity (segregation), dilution effects, and the risk of distortion. The diffusion bonding in HIP occurs at elevated temperatures and pressures, but is a solid-state process. The absence of solidification from a liquid phase during processing precludes segregation, cracking, and distortion, all of which are inherently associated with the as-cast structure of a welded coating. Brittle materials can be joined without fracturing, and dissimilar combinations, which are often difficult to weld, can be joined. nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010 Hot Isostatic Pressing (HIPing) is a thermo-mechanical process [9] in which components or a contained powder are subjected to simultaneous applications of heat and high pressure in inert medium. HIPing removes internal void cavities thus consolidating the structure to be homogenous, segregation free, dense, near-net shape and requiring little or no machining. malayogluAssessingKineticsMechanisms2005

Influence of HIPing on Stellite

Wong-Kian et al.16 showed that under erosioncorrosion conditions HIPed Stellite alloys 1, 6, and 21 had lower mass loss than the welded specimens of the same Stellites. They related their finding to the finer and homogeneous microstructure, which was obtained after HIPing. They also showed that wear resistance of the cobalt-based alloys is promoted by the harder complex carbides of chromium and tungsten, while corrosion resistance is enhanced by the presence of cobalt in the matrix. nevilleAqueousCorrosionCobalt2010

The HIPped samples also had a different carbide morphology. Optical microscopy revealed the eutectic nature of the welded carbides, and SEM studies showed that the HIPped carbides were more angular. The globular structure in the welded sample (Figure 19) may be the result of coarsening, as well as of the original eutectic morphology. wong-kianComparisonErosioncorrosionBehaviour

In previous work, the corrosion performance of the High Velocity Oxyfuel (HVOF) Stellite 6 coatings in as-sprayed and sprayed and HIPed conditions were compared. The corrosion resistance of HIPed coating was higher than the as-sprayed one [12] and this was found to be primarily due to the finer microstructure obtained after HIPing.

Influence of carbide size The welded samples experienced greater mass loss because they had larger matrix areas that were unprotected by the harder carbides, and wear occurred on these areas at higher rates. The coarser carbide size meant that, when carbide removal did occur, larger pieces were removed, which also accelerated the wear rates. The microstructural coarseness was a direct result of solidification from the liquid state. The high temperature differences experienced during welding encourage steep temperature gradients, which in turn favour the growth of dendrites and, in extreme cases, an irregular eutectic morphology. wong-kianComparisonErosioncorrosionBehaviour More usually, the carbide particles seemed to have been fractured, and then directly removed. This would be expected in the erosion-corrosion environment that the test pieces experienced. Once broken, the free particle fragments would have been swept away by the relative motion of the slurry. The effect of the larger carbide particles is shown in Figure 22: they were broken more easily and protected the matrix less effectively. The carbide particles were observed to be in relief after the surrounding softer matrix had been eroded, and could be more easily broken and removed. The larger areas of unprotected matrix then exacerbated this process. wong-kianComparisonErosioncorrosionBehaviour he welded samples experienced greater mass loss because they had larger matrix areas that were unprotected by the harder carbides, and wear occurred on these areas at higher rates. The coarser carbide size meant that, when carbide removal did occur, larger pieces were removed, which also accelerated the wear rates. The microstructural coarseness was a direct result of solidification from the liquid state. The high temperature differences experienced during welding encourage steep temperature gradients, which in turn favour the growth of dendrites and, in extreme cases, an irregular eutectic morphology. wong-kianComparisonErosioncorrosionBehaviour

COMMENT Literature Review

% CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW \chapter{Literature Review} % Total: ~10,000–15,000 words % Reviewer's Note: The focus will be on a critical synthesis of the literature to build a clear argument that identifies the research gaps, rather than a purely encyclopedic summary.

Metallurgy of Cobalt-Based Alloys

% 5–7 paragraphs. \lipsum[6-7]

Microstructure of As-Cast Stellite Alloys

% 4–6 paragraphs. \lipsum[8-9]

The Hot Isostatic Pressing Process

% 4–6 paragraphs. \lipsum[10]

Mechanical Properties of Stellite Alloys

% 5–7 paragraphs. \lipsum[11]

Corrosion Behavior of Stellite Alloys

% 5–7 paragraphs. \lipsum[12-13]

Advanced Characterization Techniques for Cobalt Superalloys

% 3-4 paragraphs. % A new section providing a critical overview of state-of-the-art techniques, justifying the methods selected for this study. \lipsum[14]

Gaps in Current Knowledge

% 2–3 paragraphs. \lipsum[15]

COMMENT Instructions regarding Introduction

Suggested word count 1500 (and perhaps 2 figures)

Figures in the introduction? No I'd be careful about the use of figures in the introduction. I made that mistake in my preliminary report and I'm still cringing about it, haha. Generally, they feel a bit out of place (unless the figure is a conceptual diagram, and even then, it's a high bar to not feel uneeded). Save the figures for later.

Core Components of the Introduction

• Present the general context and background immediately.
• Structure the chronological-ish literature review within this subsection.
• Start with a brief description of your project.
• Provide the rationale and background for your work.
• Justify and clearly state your Aims and Objectives.
• Include a concluding paragraph that describes the structure of the remaining dissertation.

Final Review and Constraints

• Check that the Introduction has a word length of 1500.
• Ensure all material presented is relevant to your research question.

The main body of the dissertation starts with an introduction, which in turn starts with a brief description of your project.

Depending on the scope of this chapter and the structure of the overall dissertation, the initial section could be followed by a statement and explanation of the Aims and Objectives. In many cases, however, this section comes after the section describing the Background

Introduction giving the rationale and background to your work. This also should justify and clearly state your aims and objectives.

There are two typical ways of structuring the introduction. The more compact form is to combine the `context' and `literature review' in a single main section, where the context is presented immediately after the section heading (ie, no subsection), and then structure the literature review as subsection within the first section, finishing off with a final subsection which states the aims and objectives as well as a paragraph describing the structure of the remaining paper.

The more extended form is to separate the context and aims from the literature review. In this case, the first 'Introduction' section presents the context and concludes with the aims and objective plus the paragraph outlining the structure of the remaining paper. The literature review itself will then be the main Section 2, with suitable subsections to structure the material.

The introduction and literature review usually makes up about 20 to 30\% of the overall paper. Make sure that all the material is relevant to your research question and your research. An example of a typical balance of the different sections expected in a standard paper is given in Tab.~\ref{Tab:method}. However, each dissertation is different, and might end up with a different balance, as long as the overall length is not exceeded. In particular, the number of figures, tables and reference can vary widely (and wildly), very much depending on the type of work carried out.

\begin{table} \protect\caption{Illustration of relative length of different sections, taken from a representative paper from a previous student.\label{Tab:method}} \begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|} \hline Section & Word count & Number of figures and tables\\ \hline \hline Introduction and Literature Review & 1500 & 2 Figures \\ \hline Apparatus and Methods & 1500 & 3 Figures and 2 Tables \\ \hline Results & 1000 -- 1500 & 5 Figures \\ \hline Discussion and Conclusions & 1000 -- 1500 & 1 Table \\ \hline Conclusions and Future work & 500 & 1 Table \\ \hline References & & 25 -- 35 references; 60\% journal articles, 10\% books, 30\% websites \\ \hline \hline Total & 6000 & 10 Figures and 3 Tables\tabularnewline \hline \end{tabular} \end{table}

Style guide

Page and text formatting

If you use the provided templates, the style requirements are already the default settings — so don't tinker with them! This LaTeX template is based on the Elsevier class but using 11pt (instead of the standard 10pt). We use the single-column format for practical reasons.

The document has to be prepared for the UK standard paper of A4 size with a text area of 16.45~cm by 21.9~cm using single columns at a `normal' serif font (e.g., Times New Roman or Cambria) with font size 11pt.

Word count

The expected word count is between 5000 and 7000 words. The word count includes everything from the start of the Introduction to the end of the Conclusions, including text in figure captions and tables. Excluded from the word count is the front matter (from the title to the end of the abstracts and key words) and the end matter (acknowledgements, references, appendices).

If you try to cheat the word count by having a lot of important information in appendices: remember that appendices only provide supplementary material, not essential material for the assessment. The markers are not required to read any appendix during the marking of the dissertation.

Section and item numbering

Paragraphs are justified on both sides and start with an indent. Section numbering is numeric, with `section' headings in bold but sub-section and subsub-section headings in italics. Each heading is preceded and followed by some space (about 6pt or half a line).

Figures, tables, and equations are numbered consecutively: Figure 1, Figure 2, Table 1, Table 2, (1), (2), and so on. That means that they are not sub-numbered for each section, so no Figure 1.2. However, a figure might have two or more graphs. In that case, each graph is labelled a), b) and so on. Similarly, equations can be single equations such as \begin{equation}\label{eq1} e = m c^2

\end{equation} or they could be a set of equations, using the environment `subequation' from the subcaption package, \begin{subequations} \label{eq2}

\begin{gather} C_p = \frac{p}{\frac{1}{2} \rho U^2} \label{eq2a} \\ C_P = \frac{P}{\frac{1}{2} \rho A U^3} \label{eq2b} \end{gather}

\end{subequations}

When referring to these objects in the text, you can use either `figure~\ref{exFigure}', `Figure~\ref{exFigure}', or `Fig~\ref{exFigure}', as long as you do it consistently. A specific graph in a multi-graph figure would be referred to as, for example Fig.~2b. Likewise, for referring to a table, you would use table, Table, or Tab.~\ref{Tab:method}, and equations are referred to as Eq.~(\ref{eq1}), Equations~(\ref{eq2}) or equation~(\ref{eq2b}).

References

These must follow the style of the journal used in the `References' at the end of this template, with an example for citing a journal article given by \cite{article}, for a contribution to conference proceedings by \cite{proc1}, and for a book by \cite{book1} or a chapter \citep{bookchapter}. If you do need to refer to websites, for example for data sources, an example is given by \cite{MIDAS} or \citep{web1}.

You can create your own *.bib file using EndNote or Mendeley and then extract and format the cited references using BibTeX.

Methodology and Apparatus

Clear description of how you approached the problem and what you did (NOT, what somebody else should do…).

This might start with an introductory paragraph providing a high-level description of your overall approach, then some specific subsections on your data sources, the methods to obtain your primary research data, sections on the instrumentation (including their accuracy and precision) or simulation software used, followed by a section how you used those tools, and complemented by an introduction to any more advanced analysis method you might have applied for the secondary analysis.

Especially in the description of your experiments or other activities, tables can be useful to summarise the key information, such as Table \ref{Tab:method}. Make sure it is complete but not too complex. Consider putting large tables in an appendix, but keep in mind the role of appendices mentioned in Section~\ref{S:Wordcount}.

Results

Describe the results and the results of their analysis

Results and primary analysis

Present the primary results in sufficient detail that the reader can get a good insight into what you obtained from your experiments or field work (or whatever you did), but avoid showing many similar graphs. Only show key samples, for example a typical case and a few unusual cases. Here, you will need to make good use of figures, such as that in Fig.~\ref{exFigure}

\begin{figure} \begin{centering} \includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{CP_vs_U_Turb_Farm} \par\end{centering} \protect\caption{Range of observed power output from a single turbine (blue shaded and cross-hatched region) and from an entire wind farm at the same site (red shaded region) against wind speed. Both are normalised by the rated power and number of turbines contributing to the power output (Data source: Vattenfall).} \label{exFigure} \end{figure}

Secondary analysis

Try to build up your many results into a systematic analysis which distills the main results and presents them in a clear way in well-designed figures.

Uncertainty analysis

Remember: any result is only credible if the reader knows how accurate your results are likely to be. This needs an error analysis or uncertainty analysis of your results.

Discussion

Here you need to draw together your various results, discuss what they mean and how reliable they are, using your uncertainty analysis and any other aspects which might limit your results such as explicit or implicit assumptions in your methodology. Then discuss how your results contribute to addressing your aims and objectives, and what your contribution to the wider field is.

There are three typical ways how the Discussion can be presented in a paper. The most extensive is to have the Discussion in its own section. From an intellectual point, this would be the recommended approach, at least to start with: it forces you to separate mentally your critical evaluation of your results from the evidence (your results) on which you base the discussion).

Another option is to merge the results and discussion into a single `Results and Discussion' section, but then you run the danger of mixing up evidence and interpretation and your lose strength in your argument.

A third option is to merge the discussion with the conclusions. Here, you run the risk of your main conclusions becoming buried in the discussion, and the reader has to guess a bit as to what your main contribution was.

Conclusions

A fairly concise section which summarises your main findings from your results and discussion sections, identifies your contribution to the field, and suggests some further work.

Bibliography   ignore_heading

\appendix

Essential appendices

Essential appendices; ie, detail without which the main paper is difficult to understand should be included here.

List of further material in the Work Progress Report

All working material and non-essential appendices must be submitted separately as the `Work Progress Report'. There is no need to refer to that material. However, if you feel that certain sections or files in that report would be useful to the reader, you can list here that material and how to find it in the Work Progress Report submission.