A comprehensive review of thermally sprayed polymer coatings: Processing techniques and engineering applications

Abstract

Polymer coatings are widely employed to improve the surface performance of engineering components by providing corrosion resistance, wear protection, hydrophobicity, biocompatibility, and functional surface characteristics. Among various deposition methods, thermal spray technologies have emerged as highly effective methods for fabricating polymer and polymer-based composite coatings on metallic, ceramic, and polymeric substrates. This review provides a comprehensive overview of thermally sprayed polymer coatings, focusing on processing methods, coating characteristics, and key application areas, along with commonly used polymers such as polyethylene (PE), polyamide (PA), polyimide (PI), polyurethane (PU), polyether ether ketone (PEEK), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), and fluoropolymers. This review critically examines the development of polymer and polymer-based composite coatings fabricated via thermal spray techniques, including flame spraying, high-velocity oxy-fuel (HVOF), plasma spray (PS), and cold spray (CS) processes. Each process offers distinct advantages in terms of particle heating, velocity, deposition efficiency, coating density, and substrate thermal exposure. Flame spraying remains the most established method for large-scale polymer coating deposition, whereas cold spray has attracted increasing attention due to its low-temperature solid-state deposition capability that minimizes thermal degradation. High-velocity oxy-fuel (HVOF) and plasma spray (PS) processes are particularly suitable for producing dense coatings and polymer ceramic composites with improved wear resistance. Functional properties including wear resistance, corrosion protection, ice-phobic behaviour, self-lubrication, antimicrobial packaging, and biofouling/fouling resistance, and biomedical applications are systematically discussed. Future opportunities are highlighted for the development of multifunctional, high-performance, and sustainable polymer-based thermal spray coatings for advanced applications in aerospace, marine, energy, transportation, and infrastructure sectors.

Keywords

thermal spray polymer coating anti-corrosion ice-phobic antimicrobial packaging biofouling/fouling resistance biomedical

Introduction

A polymer coating is a polymeric layer applied to a substrate to meet specific functional requirements. The process involves depositing the polymer onto the substrate surface, where it adheres and solidifies. Polymers are high-molecular-weight materials composed of many small molecules with identical structures covalently linked in repeating units. They may be either natural or synthetic, such as polyurethane, polyvinyl chloride (PVC), acrylics, epoxy, phenolic, silicone, and other materials.^1–3 Acrylic coatings, in particular, have been widely employed as low-cost corrosion protection layers in various applications, such as aerospace, road construction machinery, and automobiles.^4,5 Polymer coating has recently been used in a wide variety of applications and is also utilized in solar cells, batteries, separation processes, diodes, corrosion protection, packaging, and healthcare. These coatings are universal and have various functionalities, owing to their varied characteristics, which include anti-wear, mechanical stability, corrosion resistance, electrical conductivity, biocompatibility, and surface chemistry. They are also used to alter surface characteristics, including adding hydrophobicity or enhancing the quality of paper.

Although mostly organic, polymeric coatings may include ceramic or metallic particles to increase durability, functionality, or aesthetics. In this coating method, a polymeric material is deposited on a supporting substrate, as shown in Figure 1. Polymers can be applied to metals, ceramics, and synthetic substrates to enhance appearance, performance, or surface characteristics. Polymeric coatings offer strong adhesion, protection, and customized surface attributes for substrates. These finishes have been produced for several decades through thermal spraying, and the technology is advancing to enhance the quality and functionality of these finishes. Polymer coatings can be deposited through various thermal spraying techniques, including flame spray (FS), plasma spray (PS), high-velocity oxy-fuel (HVOF), and cold spray (CS).^6,7

Figure 1.

Key factors affecting polymer powder behaviour in thermal spray processing.⁶

Figure 1 shows the key factors that control thermal spray processes, which differ according to the deposition method, the polymer type, and the substrate conditions. To optimize the thermal spray process for polymers and polymer-based coatings, it is necessary to pay attention to a variety of parameters, such as particle properties, gas conditions, substrate preparation, and process conditions.⁸ Polyethylene (PE) coatings that are flame sprayed have been used to protect pipelines against corrosion, with the coating thickness normally between 1 and 3 mm.⁹ Additionally, HVOF, PS, and CS have been used to produce polymers or polymer-based coatings.

In addition to PE, thermal spraying techniques have also been employed to deposit a variety of other polymer-based coatings including polypropylene (PP),¹⁰ polyethylene terephthalate (PET),¹¹ polyamide (PA),¹² polyether sulfone (PES),¹³ polycarbonate (PC),⁶ polyphenylene sulfide (PPS),⁶ polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE),¹⁴ polyether ether ketone (PEEK),^12,15 polyimide (PI),¹² polyvinyl chloride (PVC),^10–16 polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF),¹⁷ ethylene chlorotrifluoroethylene (ECTFE),¹⁷ perfluoroalkoxy alkane (PFA),¹⁷ fluorinated perfluoroethylenepropylene (FEP),¹⁸ ethylene methacrylic acid (EMAA),¹⁹ polystyrene (PS)²⁰ and the copolymers ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) and ethylene vinyl alcohol (EVAl) with PE.²¹ PE is one of the most common polymers used in thermal spraying. It has been used in powdered forms with different densities, such as low-density polyethylene (LDPE),²² high-density polyethylene (HDPE),²⁰ and ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE).²³ Table 1 shows that polymeric materials possess significantly lower melting points compared to other thermally sprayable materials, including ceramics, metals, and hard metals.

Table 1.

Polymer materials with their melting points that are used in different thermal spray techniques.

Polymer	Melting temperature (°C)	Ref.
PP	160–176	²⁴
PE	105–140	²⁴
PVF	190–210	²⁴
PU	80–250	²⁵
• Thermoplastic PU (TPU)	• 160–220
• Thermoset PU	• 180–250 (Decomposes)
• Soft segment (low crystallinity)	• 80–150 (Softening)
PS	175	²⁵
PA	170–265	²⁵
HDPE	120–135	²⁵
UHMWPE	130–136	²⁵
PET	240–260	²⁶
FEP	250–280	¹⁷
PVDF	155–175	¹⁷
ECTFE	235–255	¹⁷
PFA	300–310	¹⁷
EMAA	80–105	²⁷

PVF = polyvinyl fluoride.

Despite extensive studies on thermally sprayed polymer and polymer-based composite coatings, several fundamental and application-level gaps remain unresolved.^28–30 First, the interfacial bonding mechanisms between polymer particles and metallic substrates are not yet fully understood, particularly under different thermal spray conditions.^31–33 Second, most studies rely on commercially available polymer powders that are not specifically engineered for thermal spray processes, leading to inconsistencies in coating quality and limited process reproducibility.^34,35 Third, there is a lack of systematic comparative studies across HVOF/HVAF, flame spray, CS, and PS techniques for identical polymer systems, making it difficult to establish reliable process structure property relationships. Additionally, polymer degradation behaviour, crystallinity evolution, and in-flight thermal history during spraying remain insufficiently quantified.^36,37 Finally, long-term performance under real-service conditions such as thermal cycling, UV exposure, and marine environments is still poorly investigated, limiting industrial validation of these coatings.

Techniques for developing polymer based coatings

Numerous methods are available to deposit ultrathin polymer films, each with distinct advantages and inherent limitations.³⁸ Figure 2 summarizes these techniques.

Figure 2.

Techniques for developing thin polymer films.⁴⁷

Despite differences in approach, the fundamental objective of all methods is to deposit a uniform polymer coating. In dip-coating, film thickness is mainly controlled by the substrate withdrawal speed from the polymer solution.^39,40 In flow-coating, the deposited film thickness is determined by the substrate’s inclination angle and the polymer solution’s viscosity.⁴¹ Spray coating offers faster deposition compared with flow and dip coating methods and is therefore generally used; however, for non-planar substrates, the control over film thickness is comparable to that achievable with dip-coating.⁴² Most commonly, methods include: thermal spray coating^31,43 and pulsed laser deposition,⁴⁴ which are without solvent, while plasma polymerization⁴⁵ and grafting⁴⁶ are governed by chemical interactions with the substrate. Plasma polymerization is typically performed under a magnetic field to induce polymerization, while grafting involves chemically anchoring polymer chains directly onto the substrate surface.

Cold spraying of polymer coatings

CS is a powder coating technology wherein coating particles are propelled to high-velocity gas-dynamic conditions (300–1200 ms^-1) using a convergent-divergent (De-Laval) nozzle geometry and impact the substrate ballistically. CS methods include:

• High-pressure (HPCS), with particles entrained upstream under high gas pressure,⁴⁸ and

• Low-pressure (LPCS), where particles enter the nozzle divergent section.⁴⁹

LPCS systems are compact and portable, with particle velocities limited to 300-600 ms^-1. Research on the cold spraying of polymers has accelerated, resulting in successfully deposition of several polymeric materials by the CS technique. Table 2 summarizes polymer-based coatings developed by the CS method. Figure 3 shows the representative polymer powders used in these studies, which highlights particle morphologies, from nearly spherical to highly irregular shapes. One major problem for cold spraying polymers, as with other thermal spray methods, is that powders are specifically fit for use. As a result, common commercially available powders are used, which have not been optimized to the CS thermal or kinetic conditions. Even though good coatings have been reported, further advances in the coating quality and performance could be achieved by the introducing special feedstock powders and streamlined processing.

Table 2.

Overview of cold-spray polymer coatings.

Coating material	Objective/Characteristics	Outcomes/Effectiveness	Ref.
HA-Ag/PEEK	Deposition of coatings	Coating had good antibacterial behaviour	⁵⁰
Chitosan-Cu/Al	Fabrication and deposition of biopolymer-metal composite coatings	Bacterial resistance coatings, deposition of biopolymer coatings reinforced with metallic powders	⁵¹
PE	Combined numerical and experimental investigations	Development and optimization of nozzles for polymer coating deposition Polymer particles did not exhibit melting during the deposition process	⁵²
UHMWPE, UHMWPE + nano-Al₂O₃/fumed nano-Al₂O₃/-SiO₂	Influence of the inclusion of ceramic particles on the characteristics of polymer coating	Thick composite coatings of UHMWPE reinforced with nano-Al₂O₃ were successfully deposited on aluminium and polypropylene substrates	⁵³
PE-CNT	Coating deposition on polypropylene (PP) and porous-structured aluminium	PE melted in the cold process of spraying, and CNTs were adsorbed on this surface	⁵⁴
HDPE	Coatings have been applied to polymer, aluminium, and quartz glass	Deposition efficiency rises with temperature, velocity, and substrate heating	⁵⁵
UHMWPE-FNA (fumed nano- Al₂O₃)	Deposition of coatings	With increasing FNA content, deposition efficiency improved	²³
UHMWPE, PU, PA, PS, and HDPE	Critical particle impact polymers decrease as temperature increases	Optimized spray parameters enabled the development of coatings with low porosity	²⁵
UHMWPE	In-flight properties of particles, including temperature and velocity	Numerical simulation of particle impacts during the CS process	⁵⁶
FEP, FEP nano-ceramic	Evaluation of the wetting behaviour	Super hydrophobic CS coatings	¹⁸
PEEK	Modelling of PEEK particle behaviour during CS deposition	Successful deposition occurs only within a narrow range of particle velocities	⁵⁷

HA-Ag = hydroxyapatite and silver-doped hydroxyapatite.

Figure 3.

SEM micrographs of the feedstock powder particles: (a) PU, (b) PA, (c) PS, and (d) UHMWPE.²⁵

High-velocity flame spraying of polymer coatings

High velocity flame spraying has been used to fabricate polymer-based coatings, such as successfully depositing PET using the HVOF method.¹¹ The results were used to direct how the coating partially crystallized during the thermal spraying process, and the subsequent melting and quick-quenching reduced the overall crystallinity. Heat treated PET has superior tribological properties compared with untreated PET, which has a lower COF and wear rate.¹¹ However, the LVOF deposited PET coatings have good resistance to alcohol, diesel oil, and gasoline, and this suggests that they could be used as corrosion-resistant films in a fuel chamber. Figure 4 shows the LVOF-sprayed PET coatings on steel microstructure. Without substrate preheating, a distinct layered structure formed, leading to poor adhesion, whereas preheating improved bonding but caused more internal bubbles due to enhanced PET thermal degradation at elevated temperatures.²⁶ The HVOF-sprayed PA coatings with silica reinforcement showed a lower COF than unreinforced PA coatings, which is attributed to changes in coating crystallinity.⁵⁸ A smearing mechanism was the main factor controlling the sliding wear of polymer coatings, although other wear processes like abrasive and fatigue wear have also been noted in polymer composite coatings.⁵⁸

Figure 4.

Optical micrographs of PET coatings deposited: without substrate heating (a) and with substrate pre-heating at 170°C (b), 200°C (c), and 215°C (d).²⁶

HVOF-sprayed ceramic/polymer composite coatings, particularly silica-reinforced nylon systems, have been extensively investigated to enhance wear resistance. In these studies, composite feedstock powders consisting of a nylon core with silica particles added in the shell and pure nylon powders were used. The silica-reinforced nylon based coatings exhibited superior wear resistance compared to pure nylon coatings, which was attributed to chemical and structural modifications induced by the added nanoscale ceramic fillers. In another research, PET coatings had been deposited with the LVOF technique, the coatings had high resistance to gasoline, diesel oil, and alcohol, and it proved that the materials would be suitable to be used as corrosive barriers in the fuel tank.⁵⁹

Plasma spray of polymer coatings

Substantial research has been conducted on fluoropolymers using plasma spraying, including (i) FEP, (ii) ECTFE, (iii) PFA, and (iv) PVDF powders,¹⁷ as well as ceramic-fluoropolymer composite coatings.^6,18,60,61 This method produces polymer-steel coatings designed to minimize friction, whereby a thin polymer layer is plasma-sprayed onto a steel substrate to enhance ease of lubrication. PA (nylon 11), PA with solid lubricants, UHMWPE, UHMWPE with solid lubricants, PTFE, and PTFE with PA mixtures have been used to develop coatings. Both MoS₂ and graphite were also tested as solid lubricant additives. These included pure PA top-coatings that were superior to wear, and continuous plasma-sprayed PTFE top-coatings that were not possible because the particles degraded during the process, giving rise to inefficient adhesion.¹⁴ For PS based PMMA coating, the thermal decomposition also increased with process temperature. Coating properties were also dependent on other parameters, like the gun traverse speed. The increased spraying rate resulted in lower wear rates and degradation, and thus enhanced the overall wear resistance.⁶² Table 3 summarizes examples of HVOF and PS-based polymer coatings reported in the literature. Recent research efforts have increasingly focused on flame spray and CS, rather than on HVOF or PS processes. Nevertheless, HVOF and PS polymer-based coatings remain of considerable interest, particularly for applications requiring enhanced wear resistance.

Table 3.

Overview of polymer-based coatings characteristics using plasma-spray and high-velocity oxygen fuel (HVOF) and low velocity oxygen fuel (LVOF) techniques.

Coating material	Coating method	Objective/Characteristics	Outcomes/Effectiveness	Ref.
PA, PA + SiO₂	HVOF	Sliding wear properties	Wear resistance was improved by the incorporation of nano-ceramic particles	^58,59
PMMA	PS	Influence of gun traverse speed and gas composition	Higher temperature gradients led to increased material decomposition	⁶²
PET	HVOF	Minimum COF	Heat-treated coatings were more wear-resistant than bulk PET.	¹¹
PET	LVOF	Influence of substrate preheating on coating properties	Increased degradation accompanied by improved adhesion	²⁶
ECTFE, PVDF, FEP, PFA PFA + ceramics PTFE + ceramics	PS	Coatings with high density and smooth surfaces. Uniform composite coating obtained via adjusted powder feed parameters	Improved wetting behaviour Low COF	^17,60,63

Flame sprayed polymer coatings

The most common technique for applying polymer coatings is flame spraying. A detailed overview of flame spraying, as well as other cold and thermal spray processes, is presented by Petrovicova et al.⁶ Specialized flame spray guns and customized systems have been designed to apply polymers and hybrid feedstock materials for advanced coatings. Flame sprayed methacrylic acid (MAA) PE coatings applied via flame spraying have been studied for steel corrosion protection. Typically, 149 µm PE powder was used with propane as the fuel, and coating substrate adhesion was strongly influenced by gas and air pressures and gun traverse speed. Cathodic delamination tests showed that stronger adhesion was associated with enhanced corrosion protection.⁶ Flame-sprayed PE (FS-PE) coatings show promise for ice-phobic applications, producing hydrophobic and ice-repellent surfaces when applied with an acetylene-oxygen flame.^10,64,65 The properties of these coatings were significantly influenced by processing parameters; for instance, the coating thickness increased when the spray distance was increased at a slower traverse speed. Another approach involved fabricating porous PE structures via flame spraying using an acetylene-oxygen flame. The resulting porous coatings were subsequently infused with lubricants to form slippery liquid-infused porous surfaces (SLIPS), which produced highly ice-repellent surfaces due to their enhanced slipperiness. Table 4 summarizes polymer-based coatings deposited by flame spraying. The advancement of thermal spray methods, polymers, and polymer-based composite coatings has largely taken place in the 21^st century.

Table 4.

Overview of polymer-based coatings via flame spraying.

Coating material	Objective/Characteristics	Outcomes/Effectiveness	Ref.
MA-modified PE	Influence of process parameters on the deposition of coatings on steel substrates	High bond strength resulted in reduced delamination during corrosion testing	⁶⁶
PVDF, ECTFE	Dense and smooth coatings	Enhanced corrosion resistance	¹⁷
LDPE-g-Mac	Maleic acid crafting improves adherence	Enhanced corrosion resistance	^22,67
EVA/PMMA, EVAl + PE, EVA	High corrosion resistance of EVA/PE coatings in saltwater environments	Anti-corrosion coatings	²¹
PP	Splat morphology was also examined on glass	Splat formation and flattening	³²
Epoxy	Flame spraying of thermoset powders.	Epoxy coating was cured using additional heat	⁶⁸
PMMA	Coating adhesion is influenced by spray parameters, hydrophilic coatings	Polymer coatings with biocompatibility for drug delivery applications	⁶⁹
EMAA, EMAA/Al₂O₃, EMAA/ZrO₂	Splats formed on mild steel and glass under heated and unheated conditions	Splat morphology is influenced by substrate chemistry, with coatings sprayed using acetylene exhibiting a more amorphous structure compared to those sprayed with propane	²⁷
EMAA	Splats deposited on mild steel substrates	Influence of stand of distance on splat flattening and coating microstructure	^19,27
PA + PU	Liquid-solid lubrication achieved via flame spraying	Coatings designed to reduce friction through inherent self-lubricating properties, coatings with self-healing properties	⁷⁰
PEI, PEEK, PA	Coatings exhibiting high density and smooth surfaces, exhibiting good adhesion	Among the three polymers, PA exhibits the best wear and corrosion resistance, followed by PEEK, while PEI shows the weakest performance in these aspects	^12,71
LDPE	Exhibiting medium-low or low ice adhesion strength	Polymer coatings enhanced ice-phobic property	^64,65
PP, PE + FEB, PEEK, UHMWPE	Exhibiting medium-low or low ice adhesion strength	Polymer coatings enhanced ice-phobic property	¹⁰
PEEK	Heat treatment increased the coating crystallinity and hardness	Improved tribo-mechanical behaviour	¹⁵
LDPE + solid lubricants	Minimum ice adhesion, corrosion-resistant improves	Ice-phobic coatings	^72,73
PEEK + CNTs (carbon nanotubes)	Mechanical blending and ultrasonic dispersion for powder blending	Denser coatings and better tribo-mechanical behaviour were the outcomes of the feedstock powder’s ultrasound dispersion	⁷⁴

MA-modified PE = maleic anhydride-modified polyethylene.

Modelling of polymer coatings via flame sprayed

Flame spraying amorphous PEEK has been investigated for applications involving wear protection and friction reduction. In this process, relatively fine particles (typically <25 µm) are used to improve melting and deposition behaviour. The metal substrate is preheated prior to coating deposition, followed by post-spraying quenching. This thermal cycle promotes a semi-crystalline coating structure, which results in increased hardness and enhanced wear and friction performance.⁷⁵ Soveja et al.⁷⁶ demonstrated that flame-sprayed (FS) PEEK coatings can be further densified through laser post-treatment acting as a controlled re-melting process. This treatment not only reduces porosity and increases coating density but also improves adhesion strength between the steel substrate and PEEK layer due to localized polymer fusion. Overall, flame spraying PEEK requires carefully controlling processing conditions, including substrate preheating and post-treatment, to achieve high-quality coatings. A critical factor is maintaining a relatively low processing temperature, which has been achieved through advancements in process optimization and nozzle design. Using these improvements, dense PEEK coatings (see Figure 5(a)) suitable for corrosion protection have been successfully produced.¹⁵ Similarly, Lima et al.¹² reported fabricating dense flame-sprayed coatings of PEEK, polyetherimide (PEI), and PA, and demonstrated this technique’s versatility for high-performance polymer coatings. Figure 6 shows the surface morphology and microstructural characteristics of flame-sprayed PE and PE-based composite coatings containing natural additives derived from capsaicin. In addition, dense PE coatings have been successfully fabricated, demonstrating that coating microstructure can be effectively tailored by modifying the feedstock composition.⁷⁷

Figure 5.

(a) PEEK coating deposited on steel substrate via flame sprayed.¹⁵ (b) Flame profiles corresponding to different nozzle designs.⁸⁴

Figure 6.

Surface and microstructural characterization of PE and PE capsaicin composite coatings via flame-sprayed.⁷⁷

In addition to PE and PEEK coatings, studies on flame-sprayed fluoropolymer coatings such as FEP, PFA, ECTFE, and PVDF have reported the formation of dense and even surfaces, which are highly valuable for corrosion protection applications.¹⁷ Similarly, flame-sprayed ethylene-methacrylic acid (EMAA) and polypropylene (PP) splats have been investigated to assess how process parameters affect splat formation and spreading behavior.^19,32 For instance, spray distance significantly affects how the EMAA particles flatten, and the optimal spray distance varies depending on the substrate material. Xie et al.¹⁹ reported that EMAA splat flattening on glass substrates increased with spray distance up to approximately 30 cm, whereas for steel substrates the effective limit was around 25 cm. This difference was attributed to higher splat temperatures on steel substrates, resulting from steel’s the higher thermal conductivity compared to glass. In recent years, liquid flame spraying (LFS) has emerged as a novel approach for polymer coating deposition, in which liquid precursors or suspensions are used as feedstock materials. In this process, the feedstock undergoes in-flame synthesis and is subsequently deposited onto the substrate surface.⁷⁸ Wang et al.⁷⁹ utilised an oxygen acetylene flame for LFS of PI and PI copper (PI-Cu) composite coatings. In addition, Liu et al.⁸⁰ investigated suspension flame spraying to produce PI-Cu composite coatings for antifouling and anticorrosion applications, combining the benefits of organic polymer matrices and inorganic phases.

Flame spraying of HDPE and HDPE reinforced with copper (HDPE + Cu) has also been investigated for antifouling and anticorrosion applications. This technique enables homogeneous and dense HDPE + Cu coatings using Cu-coated HDPE feedstock particles.⁸¹ In addition, both FS HDPE and HDPE + Cu systems have been evaluated for anti-aging performance.⁸² Accelerated aging tests using xenon lamp exposure showed that HDPE + Cu coatings exhibited superior aging resistance compared to pure HDPE coatings, attributed to the added copper’s stabilizing effect. Moreover, Liu et al.⁷⁷ applied flame spraying to develop HDPE capsaicin composite coatings for antifouling applications. In another study, PHBV/50PMMA coatings were successfully produced using oxygen acetylene flame spraying for biomedical applications. Such flame-sprayed polymer coatings have demonstrated potential for creating hydrophilic and biocompatible surfaces suitable for drug delivery systems following implant surgery. Flame-sprayed maleic anhydride (MAH)-grafted (LDPE) and MAH-g-LDPE/ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) composite coatings have also been developed for corrosion protection. These composite systems, particularly when combined with nano-fillers, exhibited improved corrosion resistance, while MAH-g-LDPE coatings showed superior abrasion resistance.⁸³ Additionally, flame-sprayed maleic acid (MAH)-grafted LDPE coatings demonstrated higher adhesion strength compared to conventional LDPE coatings.²² Li et al.⁷⁸ investigated flame-sprayed PEEK reinforced with CNTs, which exhibited enhanced coating quality and improved tribological performance due to the lubricating effect of CNTs, resulting in superior wear resistance. Furthermore, the use of ultrasound-assisted dispersion for preparing PEEK/CNT feedstock led to denser coatings compared to mechanically blended powders. This improvement was attributed to enhanced splat formation and spreading behaviour of PEEK particles, which contributed to better overall coating performance.⁷⁴

Flame spraying of PA, HDPE, and PET has been carried out using an air propane flame spray system. In this process, heat input can be controlled through nozzle design, as illustrated in Figure 5(b). By adjusting the combustible mixture supplied through the central jet (V) and introducing additional air flow (V_g), the flame geometry can be modified, which significantly affects coating formation and final properties. The flame environment may be tailored to create oxidizing, neutral, or reducing conditions depending on the gas-to-air ratio. For instance, PA coatings produced under oxidizing flame conditions exhibit improved adhesion strength. This enhancement in coating–substrate bonding is attributed to forming oxygen-containing functional groups on the polymer surface during exposure to oxidizing flame conditions, which promotes better interfacial interaction.⁸⁴

Modelling flame-sprayed polymer coatings is essential for understanding and optimizing the complex interactions governing coating formation. In particular, computational fluid dynamics (CFD), finite element modelling (FEM), and multiscale modelling approaches are widely used to describe particle dynamics, heat transfer, and microstructural evolution during the deposition of polymer coatings such as PEEK, PE, HDPE, and fluoropolymers.^43,85,86 At the particle scale the thermal modelling describes the heating, melting and solidification of polymer particles in flight. The extent of the melting of the particles on impact depends on the transient heat conduction governing the evolution of the particle temperature, and thus strongly influences the splat formation and the quality of the computational fluid dynamics coating.^87,88 The heat transfer process is described by the transient heat conduction equation, also known as the heat diffusion equation, which is widely used in the thermal modelling of coatings during processes such as flame spraying.

ρ ∁ p \frac{\partial T}{\partial t} = k \nabla^{2} T

(1)

Where:

$ρ$	=	Density
$∁ p$	=	Specific heat at constant pressure
k	=	Thermal conductivity
T	=	Temperature.

Equation (1) shows that the Heat storage rate in the coating = Heat conduction rate in the coating.

The CFD model is often used at the process level to simulate flame jet behaviour, particle trajectories and spray plume characteristics. These models are used for optimizing process parameters like spray distance, gas-to-fuel ratio, nozzle geometry. Flame conditions such as oxidizing, neutral, reducing are also considered to model surface reactions and polymer modification during the deposition.^43,89,90 The particle deformation, spreading and adhesion at the impact level are analysed through FEM. Such simulations give insight in splat morphology, the bonding strength between the splats and the substrate and how residual stresses develop which are vital for coating durability.^87,88,91 Significant effects of substrate thermal conductivity and preheating conditions on cooling rate and interfacial solidification behaviour are reported. On the microstructural scale, crystallization kinetics and phase transformation models are applied to the predict how the semi-crystalline structures develop, especially for PEEK coatings. These models are used to relate cooling rate and thermal history to hardness, wear resistance and adhesion properties.⁹²

For polymer nanocomposite coatings, multiscale modelling tools are used, to take into account the reinforcement effect of the fillers like carbon nanotubes and metallic particles. These models are able to describe the benefits of the improved tribological performance and mechanical strength, arising from changes in load transfer and interfacial behavior.⁹² In general, the integrated CFD-FEM thermal modelling approach offers a comprehensive understanding how the flame-sprayed polymer coatings form and can predict and optimize the coating performance.^43,85,92

Major application areas of polymer coatings using thermal spray techniques

Coating to enhance ice phobicity of surfaces

FS-PE^64,65 and PE with fusion-bonded epoxy (PE + FEB) coatings exhibit low to medium-low ice adhesion associated with high longevity. Moreover, the ice adhesion of coatings can be diminished through surface polishing. Figure 7 demonstrates the markedly reduced ice adhesion of an FS-PE coating relative to aluminium, stainless steel, and polyurethane paint, indicating that the coated surface has enhanced de-icing performance. These coatings showed hydrophobicity, enhancing ice-phobicity, while low ice adhesion strength is crucial for ice-phobic efficiency.⁶⁵ TS-SLIPS exhibit remarkably minimal ice adhesion and can be considered innovative ice-phobic solutions. According to Donadei et al.⁶⁴ indicated that thermal spray process parameters substantially impact polymer thermal degradation, thereby influencing ice adhesion. Specifically, diminished thermal deterioration led to decreased ice adhesion, a situation attained by increasing the spray gun traverse speed.

Figure 7.

Ice adhesion strength values for FS-PE coating, stainless steel (SS), aluminium (Al), and polyurethane paint (PU paint).⁶⁵

Coating to enhance biofouling/fouling resistance

Marine biofouling refers to the accumulation of micro and macro-organisms on man-made surfaces in marine environments. It is a global issue that significantly impacts oceanic and aquatic industries.^93,94 Biofouling can cause severe damage to shipping containers, submerged structures, heat exchangers, and offshore platforms. In marine vessels, biofouling increases surface roughness, leading to higher frictional resistance and, consequently, increased fuel consumption.⁹⁵ Additionally, it promotes the formation of corrosive environments, accelerating metal corrosion and structural degradation.⁹⁶

To overcome these challenges, various polymer-based coatings with antifouling properties have been developed to prevent, control, and manage marine fouling.^97,98 To address marine biofouling, advanced antifouling polymer coatings have been developed, including polymer brush coatings synthesized using atom transfer radical polymerization (ATRP).⁹⁹ ATRP is a controlled radical polymerization technique that precisely tailors coating structures and properties.^100,101 In recent years, biocide-based coatings have become widely used in commercial antifouling applications.¹⁰² These coatings are typically classified based on their release mechanisms into controlled depletion polymer coatings (soluble matrix), contact leaching coatings (insoluble matrix), and self-polishing copolymer (SPC) coatings (Figure 8). Common polymer matrices such as epoxy, vinyl, acrylic, and rubber are generally insoluble in seawater and serve as carriers for toxic agents. However, the release rate of these biocides decreases over time, which reduces their long-term effectiveness. As a result, many antifouling coatings suffer from limited service life, restricting their practical applications. Therefore, further research is needed to enhance their durability and stability. One promising approach is the development of polymeric nanocomposite coatings, which may offer improved performance compared to conventional polymer-based coatings.

Figure 8.

Schematic illustration of biocide-based antifouling coating types: (a) contact leaching, (b) soluble matrix, (c) self-polishing copolymer systems.¹⁰²

Liquid Flame Spraying (LFS) can deposit PI-Cu composite coatings with notable fouling-resistant properties, achieving thicknesses from tens of micrometres to several millimetres depending on processing conditions. LFS-PI coatings provided significant corrosion resistance, but LFS-PI and Cu coatings had superior antibacterial efficacy and accomplished sterilization against E. coli, signifying a robust fouling-resistant capability. Figure 9 depicts the corrosion behaviour and antibacterial test outcomes of LFS-PI, PI, and Cu coatings relative to the relevant reference materials.⁷⁹ Furthermore, HDPE and HDPE + Cu coatings deposited via flame spraying have been developed for combined fouling-resistant and corrosion resistance. In this study, Jia et al.⁸¹ employed particles comprising an HDPE core enveloped by a copper shell, which were deposited using flame spraying to develop HDPE + Cu composite coatings. The core shell coating was designed to enable controlled copper release, ensuring prolonged fouling-resistant performance.

Figure 9.

(a) Polarization curves of stainless steel 316 L plate in seawater; (b) Antibacterial testing of the samples; digital photographs showing E. coli colonies on nutrient agar after 6 h incubation.⁷⁹

Coating to enhance corrosion resistance

Fluoropolymer coatings applied through thermal spraying exhibit excellent corrosion resistance properties.¹⁷ David et al.⁶⁷ examined flame-sprayed maleic anhydride-grafted low-density polyethylene (FS MAH-g-LDPE) coatings and found superior corrosion resistance relative to flame-sprayed LDPE coatings, which was ascribed to improved coating adherence and elevated crystallinity in the coatings. FS-PE coatings incorporated with methacrylic acid modified poly (ethylene) (PE MAA) copolymer were applied for corrosion protection of steel. Polymer coating delamination reduces corrosion protection and must be considered in barrier assessments.⁶⁶ Nano clay-reinforced flame-sprayed MAH-g-LDPE/UHMWPE coatings enhanced corrosion resistance properties.⁸³ The corrosion rate dropped from 0.170 mm/year for uncoated mild steel to 0.028 mm/year for steel coated with FS MAH-g-LDPE/UHMWPE in a 3.5 weight percent NaCl solution.⁸³ In another example, Tailor et al.¹⁵ examined flame-sprayed PEEK coatings on mild steel for corrosion mitigation. A dense coating was generated on steel that demonstrated a reduced corrosion rate by 82% in 5% NaCl solution. Annealing also increased wear resistance by increasing the coating mechanical characteristics, which led to a semi-crystalline PEEK coating having a COF greater than coating with an amorphous structure.¹⁵ Lima et al.¹² examined the wear and corrosion behaviour of flame-sprayed PA, PEI, and PEEK coatings, finding that PA coatings exhibited superior abrasive wear resistance, attributed to higher crystallinity, improved adhesion strength, and lower residual stresses. The PA and PEEK coating had corrosion resistance better than PEI, which displayed colour change and disintegration after 2000 h in the H₂SO₄ solution.¹² The thermally sprayed coating of PEI, PA, and PEEK is also suitable, as corrosion resistance and wear protection of metallic substrates can be accomplished simultaneously.

Coating to enhance self-lubrication

Polyurea microcapsules filled with lubricants were used to improve the lubrication of thermally sprayed polymer coating. Silicone oil and polyalphaolefin (PAO) were used as the encapsulating lubricants.¹⁷ Armada et al.¹⁷ successfully produced liquid-solid self-lubricating finishes through the flame spray technique, whereby the operating parameters were precisely monitored to ensure that the microcapsules were not damaged. The coating layers formed showed self-healing characteristics, indicating improved frictional performance (Figure 10).

Figure 10.

(a) SEM image of one single capsule at high magnification, (b) Various coatings, namely nylon, FS capsule layer, and three capsule-containing coatings, along with their corresponding COF values.¹⁷

Coating to enhance antimicrobial packaging

A key application of polymer coatings is antimicrobial packaging, which releases antimicrobial agents upon contact with food.^103–105 Different polymers have been applied in the antimicrobial packaging materials. Some are low density polyethylene, chitosan and methyl cellulose. The polymers are mostly used as carriers for the antimicrobial agents, which include benzoic anhydride, sorbic acid, imazalil and sodium benzoate. For example, Chung et al.¹⁰⁶ developed a commercial synthetic polymer emulsion, which contained propyl paraben and clay, for antimicrobial packaging material. It has been suggested that such an antimicrobial coating can be used for packaging liquids. The way propyl paraben-coated paper provides antimicrobial protection involves the active antimicrobial compound diffusing towards the interfacial region and then mass transfer to the food. Initially, propyl paraben concentration in the film was found to be 10.52 × 10^-4 g/m³ at 30°C, whereas the propyl paraben diffusion coefficient in water varied between 7 × 10^-11 to 11 × 10^-11 cm²/s at 30°C. The diffusion mechanisms, release kinetics, and interactions between the antimicrobial and the contacting food, as well as the antimicrobial and polymer matrix are important characteristics in the design and performance of antimicrobial packaging systems.¹⁰⁶

Coating for biomedical applications

Polymer coatings have demonstrated significant promise across many biomedical applications, including tissue engineering, biosensors, orthopaedic materials, and drug delivery systems (see Figure 11).¹⁰⁷ Polymer coatings exhibit several advantageous properties such as corrosion resistance, electrical conductivity, mechanical strength, and biocompatibility making them suitable for high-performance engineering applications.¹⁰⁸ In particular, their biocompatibility, elasticity, and mechanical stability make polymer coatings highly important in tissue engineering.¹⁰⁹ Several materials have been used for this purpose, including synthetic polymers such as polyesters, polyurethane, polycaprolactone, poly(diol citrate), poly(polyol sebacate), and glycolide/lactide copolymers, as well as biological and natural polymers like proteins (elastin, collagen, fibrin) and polysaccharides (gelatin, cellulose, alginate, starch, and chitin).¹¹⁰ However, the natural polymers which are derived from biological sources cannot be utilized in the development of tissue culture scaffolds. Polymer coatings also play an important role in drug delivery applications, particularly in advanced systems such as microneedles.¹¹¹ Polymer-coated microneedles have shown strong potential for efficient drug and vaccine delivery and offer several advantages over conventional hypodermic needles. Spray-coated microneedle patches have been developed using commonly used film-forming polymers such as hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose and carboxymethyl cellulose.¹¹² Recent research has also focused on developing novel non-metallic coatings for orthopedic applications.^113,114 Conventional metal-to-metal bone resurfacing systems often suffer from issues such as corrosion and wear debris generation. In contrast, polymer-based coatings such as UHMWP used in acetabular cups for total hip replacement have demonstrated improved performance. These polymer-coated implants offer desirable properties including low density, appropriate elastic modulus, fracture toughness, and compressive yield strength, making them suitable for bone-related applications.¹¹⁵ In addition, conducting polymer systems such as magnesium coated with poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) (PEDOT) using ionic liquid electrolytes have shown reduced corrosion rates and improved mechanical strength. Conducting polymers are also widely used in biosensor applications due to their flexibility, biocompatibility, and ease of deposition. For instance, poly(3-aminophenyl boronic acid-co-3-octylthiophene) has been coated on glassy carbon electrodes for biosensing applications, while conducting polymers and their nanocomposites are increasingly used in amperometric biosensors for nanotechnology-based diagnostics.¹¹⁶ Despite these advances, further research is still required to develop novel polymeric nanocomposite coatings with improved performance for applications in biosensors, tissue engineering, orthopedics, and drug delivery systems.

Figure 11.

Polymer coatings in biomedical areas.

Conclusion and future outlook

This review critically analyzed the development of thermally sprayed polymer and polymer-based composite coatings using flame spray, HVOF/HVAF, PS, and CS techniques. The literature confirms that polymers such as PE, PI, fluoropolymers, and high-performance thermoplastics can be effectively deposited to achieve functional surfaces with improved corrosion resistance, wear protection, ice-phobicity, bio-fouling/fouling resistance, and self-lubrication, antimicrobial packaging, biomedical applications have been primarily focused on tissue engineering, biosensors, orthopedics, stents, and antibacterial surfaces. Among the available processes, flame spraying remains the most widely adopted due to its simplicity and industrial scalability, while CS is emerging as a promising low-temperature technique that reduces thermal degradation and enables dense coating formation. However, variability in coating performance arises from differences in feedstock morphology, particle thermal history, and substrate conditions, indicating the absence of standardized processing structure property relationships. Despite significant progress, limitations remain in understanding particle deformation and bonding mechanisms, along with a lack of engineered polymer powders and insufficient comparative studies across thermal spray techniques. Future research should focus on engineered feedstock design, in-situ diagnostics, and data driven optimization approaches to enable reproducible and scalable coating processes. Sustainable and bio-based polymer coatings also represent an important direction for environmentally friendly surface engineering applications.

Footnotes

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to Production and Industrial Engineering Department, Punjab Engineering College (Deemed to be University), Chandigarh, India, institution for providing the necessary facilities and support to carry out this review work. The authors also acknowledge all researchers whose valuable contributions in the field of thermally sprayed polymer coatings have helped in preparing this manuscript.

ORCID iD

Anish Kumar Bisht

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Anish Kumar Bisht: Methodology, Conceptualization, Writing - original draft, Investigations. Rahul O. Vaishya: Methodology, Formal analysis, Supervision. R. S. Walia: Methodology, Formal analysis, Supervision, Validation. Nitin Phafat: Formal analysis, Supervision.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be available on request.*

Author biographies

Anish Kumar Bisht is currently pursuing his Ph.D from Punjab Engineering College (Deemed to be University), Chandigarh, and is actively engaged in advanced research in the field of engineering and materials science. He also holds an M.Tech degree from the same institution, reflecting his strong academic background and continued association with the college. His primary area of research is thermal spray coating, with a focus on developing advanced surface engineering solutions to enhance wear resistance, corrosion resistance, thermal stability, and overall performance of engineering components.

Dr. Rahul O. Vaishya holds a Ph.D. from PEC University of Technology. He serves as an Assistant Professor in Production and Industrial Engineering and holds a Ph.D. from PEC University of Technology. His academic and research contributions are focused on advancing modern manufacturing technologies and engineering applications. His major research interests include Modern Manufacturing, CAD/CAM, CNC Machining, Hybrid (Additive + Subtractive) Manufacturing, and Fiber Reinforced Plastics (FRP). Through his expertise, R.O. Vaishya contributes to bridging theoretical knowledge with practical industrial innovations.

Prof. R. S. Walia holds a Ph.D. from Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, reflecting a strong foundation in advanced engineering research, and currently serves as a Professor in Production and Industrial Engineering, where he has contributed significantly to teaching, research, and academic development. His major research interests span a broad range of modern engineering disciplines, including Advanced Manufacturing Processes, Metal Matrix Composites, Thermal Coating, Surface Engineering, Optimization, Additive Manufacturing, Industrial Engineering, Supply Chain Management, and Ergonomics. His multidisciplinary expertise bridges conventional manufacturing with emerging technologies, making notable contributions to both academia and industry-oriented research.

Prof. Nitin Phafat is a Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Jawaharlal Nehru Engineering College, MGM University, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, India. He has extensive academic and research experience in the field of mechanical engineering, with a focus on advanced manufacturing processes, materials engineering, and surface engineering. Dr. Phafat has contributed to several research publications in reputed national and international journals and conferences. His areas of expertise include polymer-based coatings, thermal spray technologies, and computational modeling techniques such as finite element analysis (FEA).

References

Verma

Kumar

Chaurasiya

, et al. Polymer and applications: a review. Res J Med Sci 2024; 6: 16–29.

Speight

JG.

Handbook of industrial hydrocarbon processes. 2020. Netherlands: Gulf Professional Publishing, ISBN: 9780128099247, 0128099240. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809923-0.00014-X

Nasser

Hussin

El-wahab

, et al. Pure and applied chemistry nano emulsion binders for paper coating synthesis and application. J Macromol Sci, Pure Appl Chem 2017; 54: 271–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/10601325.2017.1294450

Shi

Anh

Suo

, et al. Effect of nanoparticles on the anticorrosion and mechanical properties of epoxy coating. Surf Coating Technol 2009; 204: 237–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2009.06.048

Bisht

Vaishya

Walia

, et al. Nitrides ceramic coatings for tribological applications: a journey from binary to high-entropy compositions. Ceram Int 2024; 50(6): 8553–8585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2023.12.245

Petrovicova

Schadler

. Thermal spraying of polymers. Int Mater Rev 2013; 47(4): 169–190. https://doi.org/10.1179/095066002225006566

Tyagi

Walia

Murtaza

, et al. A critical review of diamond like carbon coating for wear resistance applications. Int J Refract Metals Hard Mater 2019; 78: 107–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmhm.2018.09.006

Agrawal

Kaur

Walia

. Engineering optimisation of process parameters for polymers: an overview. Int J Exp Des Process 2019; 6(2): 89. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEDPO.2019.101718

Pawlowski

. The science and engineering of thermal spray coatings. John Wiley & Sons, 2008, p. 656.

10.

Koivuluoto

Hartikainen

Niemelä-anttonen

. Thermally sprayed coatings: novel surface engineering strategy towards icephobic solutions. Materials 2020; 3(6): 1434. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13061434

11.

Branco

JRT

Campos

. Wear behavior of thermally sprayed PET. Surf Coating Technol 1999; 121: 476–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0257-8972(99)00504-6

12.

Lima

CRC

De Souza

NFC

Camargo

. Study of wear and corrosion performance of thermal sprayed engineering polymers. Surf Coating Technol 2013; 220: 140–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2012.05.051

13.

Bruehl

Bobzin

Hujanen

, et al. Hexaferrite/polyester composite coatings for electromagnetic-wave absorbers. J Therm Spray Technol 2011; 20: 638–644. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-010-9607-8

14.

Niebuhr

Scholl

. Synthesis and performance of plasma-sprayed polymer/steel coating system. J Therm Spray Technol 2005; 14: 487–494. https://doi.org/10.1361/105996305X76496

15.

Tailor

Vashistha

Modi

, et al. One-step fabrication of thermal sprayed polymer coating on metals one-step fabrication of thermal sprayed polymer coating on metals. Mater Res Express 2020; 7: 016425. https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/ab6a4f

16.

Ehrenstein

Pongratz

. Resistance and stability of polymers. Hanser, 2013.

17.

Leivo

Wilenius

Kinos

, et al. Properties of thermally sprayed fluoropolymer PVDF, ECTFE, PFA and FEP coatings. Prog Org Coating 2004; 49: 69–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2003.08.011

18.

Lock

Kesavan

Bernard

, et al. Deposition mechanism analysis of cold-sprayed fluoropolymer coatings and its wettability evaluation. J Therm Spray Technol 2020; 29: 1643–1659. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-020-01059-w

19.

Xie

Wang

Berndt

. Analysis of EMAA splats on glass and mild steel substrates. J Therm Spray Technol 2014; 23: 317–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-013-9989-5

20.

Khalkhali

Rajan

Rothstein

. Peening effect of glass beads in the cold spray deposition of polymeric powders. J Therm Spray Technol 2020; 29(4): 657–669. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-020-01001-0

21.

Tambe

Singh

Patri

, et al. Studies on anticorrosive properties of thermally sprayable EVA and EVAl coating. Prog Org Coating 2010; 67(3): 239–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2009.12.002

22.

Singh

Tambe

Raja

, et al. Thermally sprayable polyethylene coatings for marine environment. Prog Org Coating 2007; 60: 186–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2007.07.028

23.

Ravi

Deplancke

Ogawa

, et al. Understanding deposition mechanism in cold sprayed ultra high molecular weight polyethylene coatings on metals by isolated particle deposition method. Addit Manuf 2018; 2: 191–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.02.022

24.

Rudin

. The element of polymer science and engineering. 3rd ed. Elsevier, 2012.

25.

Khalkhali

Rothstein

. Characterization of the cold spray deposition of a wide variety of polymeric powders. Surf Coating Technol 2020; 283: 125251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2019.125251

26.

Duarte

Paula

. Production and characterization of thermally sprayed polyethylene terephthalate coatings. Surf Coating Technol 2004; 182: 261–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2003.08.062

27.

Xie

. Thermal spray processing of ethylene methacrylic acid and polymer-ceramic composites. Swinburne, 2013.

28.

Moridi

Guagliano

Dao

. Cold spray coating: review of material systems and future perspectives. Surf Eng 2014; 36(6): 369–395. https://doi.org/10.1179/1743294414Y.0000000270

29.

Martin

Rad

Hussain

AMT

. Beyond traditional coatings: a review on thermal-sprayed functional and smart coatings. J Therm Spray Technol. 2019; 4: 28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-019-00857-1

30.

Baktir

Demirbuga

Balkaya

, et al. Polymeric coatings improve mechanical and biological properties of resin composites: an in vitro study. J Dent 2026; 166: 166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2026.106350

31.

Koivuluoto

. A review of thermally sprayed polymer coatings. J Therm Spray Technol 2022; 31: 1750–1764. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-022-01404-1

32.

Alamara

Saber-samandari

Berndt

. Splat taxonomy of polymeric thermal spray coating. Surf Coating Technol 2011; 205: 5028–5034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2011.05.002

33.

Zou

Chen

Yao

, et al. Chemical reaction and bonding mechanism at the polymer − metal interface. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 2022; 14: 27383–27396. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.2c04971

34.

de Espinosa

Fiore

Weder

, et al. Healable supramolecular polymer solids. Prog Polym Sci 2015; 49-50: 60–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2015.04.003

35.

Fauchais

Montavon

Bertrand

. From powders to thermally sprayed coatings. J Therm Spray Technol 2010; 19: 56–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-009-9435-x

36.

Groza

. Advances in polymer based composite coatings. Polymers 2021; 13(10): 1611. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13101611

37.

Bernard

Takana

Diguet

, et al. Thermal gradient of in-flight polymer particles during cold spraying. J Mater Process Technol 2020; 286: 286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2020.116805

38.

Norrman

Ghanbari-Siahkali

Larsen

. 6 Studies of spin-coated polymer films. In: Annual reports section “C”(Physical chemistry). RSC Publishing, 2005, pp. 174–201. https://doi.org/10.1039/b408857n

39.

Callewaert

Gohy

Dupont-Gillain

, et al. Surface morphology and wetting properties of surfaces coated with an amphiphilic diblock copolymer. Surf Sci 2005; 575: 125–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susc.2004.11.014

40.

Oliveiro

Zarbin

. A cheap and simple procedure for building a dip coating equipment for the thin film deposit in the laboratory. Quim Nova 2005; 28(1): 141–144.

41.

Belleville

Bonnin

Priotton

. Room-temperature mirror preparation using sol-gel chemistry and laminar-flow coating technique. J Sol Gel Sci Technol 2000; 19: 223–226. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008788322168

42.

Ichiki

Zhang

Yang

, et al. Thin film formation on non-planar surface with use of spray coating fabrication. Microsyst Technol 2004; 10: 360–363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00542-004-0443-y

43.

Mostaghimi

Chandra

Ghafouri-Azar

, et al. Modeling thermal spray coating processes: a powerful tool in design and optimization. Surf Coating Technol 2003; 164: 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0257-8972(02)00686-2

44.

Singh

Narayan

. Pulsed-laser evaporation technique for deposition of thin films: physics and theoretical model. Phys Rev B 1990; 41(13): 8843–8859. https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevb.41.8843

45.

Kumar

Grant

Alancherry

, et al. Plasma polymerization: electronics and biomedical application. Plasma Science and Technology for Emerging Economies: An AAAPT Experience. 2017; 6: 593–657. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4217-1

46.

Minko

Patil

Datsyuk

, et al. Synthesis of adaptive polymer brushes via “Grafting to”. Langmuir 2002; 18: 289–296. https://doi.org/10.1021/la015637q

47.

Das

Chanda

. Fabrication and properties of spin-coated polymer films. Nano-Size Polymers: Preparation, Properties, Applications. 2016; 8: 283–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39715-3

48.

Anatoly

Alkhimov

. Gas-dynamic spraying method for applying a coating. United States Patent. 1994; 75(19): Patent No. 5,302,414.

49.

Fedorovich

Buzdygar

Ganey

. Apparatus for gas-dynamic coating. United States Patent. 2002; 1(12): Patent No. 6,402,050.

50.

Sanpo

Tan

Cheang

, et al. Antibacterial property of cold-sprayed HA-Ag/PEEK coating. J Therm Spray Technol 2009; 18(1): 10–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-008-9283-0

51.

Sanpo

Ang

Cheang

, et al. Antibacterial property of cold sprayed Chitosan-Cu/Al coating. J Therm Spray Technol 2009; 18(4): 600–608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-009-9391-5

52.

Alhulaifi

Buck

Arbegast

. Numerical and experimental investigation of cold spray gas dynamic effects for polymer coating. J Therm Spray Technol 2012; 21: 852–862. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-012-9743-4

53.

Ravi

Ichikawa

Deplancke

, et al. Development of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) coating by cold spray technique. J Therm Spray Technol 2015; 24: 1015–1025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-015-0276-5

54.

Ata

Ohtake

Akasaka

. Polyethylene -carbon nanotube composite film deposited by cold spray technique. J Therm Spray Technol 2017; 26: 1541–1547. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-017-0617-7

55.

Bush

Khalkhali

Champagne

, et al. Optimization of cold spray deposition of high-density polyethylene powders. J Therm Spray Technol 2017; 26: 1548–1564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-017-0627-5

56.

Bernard

Takana

Diguet

, et al. Thermal gradient of in-flight polymer particles during cold spraying. J Mater Process Technol 2020; 286: 116805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2020.116805

57.

Kishore

Kazi

Uddin

, et al. Analyzing the effects of particle diameter in cold spraying of thermoplastic polymers. J Therm Spray Technol 2021; 30: 1226–1238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-021-01219-6

58.

Jackson

Ivosevic

Knight

, et al. Sliding wear properties of hvof thermally sprayed nylon-11 and nylon-11/ceramic composites on steel. J Therm Spray Technol 2007; 16: 927–932. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-007-9088-6

59.

Schadler

Laul

Smith

, et al. Microstructure and mechanical properties of thermally sprayed silica/nylon nanocomposites. J Therm Spray Technol 1997; 6: 475–485. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-997-0034-4

60.

Costil

Mateus

Coddet

. Ceramic/fluoropolymer composite coatings by plasma spraying. Surf Coating Technol 2006; 201: 2020–2027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2006.04.051

61.

Pawlowski

. The science and engineering of thermal spray coatings. Wiley, 2008, pp. 3–4.

62.

Zhang

Gawne

Bao

. The influence of process parameters on the degradation of thermally sprayed polymer coatings. Surf Coating Technol 1997; 96: 337–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0257-8972(97)00269-7

63.

Mateus

Costil

Bolot

, et al. Ceramic/fluoropolymer composite coatings by thermal spraying-a modification of surface properties. Surf Coating Technol 2005; 191: 108–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2004.04.084

64.

Donadei

Koivuluoto

Sarlin

, et al. Icephobic behaviour and thermal stability of flame-sprayed polyethylene coating: the effect of process parameters. J Therm Spray Technol 2020; 29: 241–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-019-00947-0

65.

Apostol

. Anti-icing behavior of thermally sprayed polymer coatings. J Therm Spray Technol. 2017; 1: 150–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-016-0501-x

66.

Herman

. AC evaluation of methacrylic acid-modified poly (ethylene) coatings applied by flame spray technology. Prog Org Coating 1995; 25: 205–216.

67.

David

Tambe

Singh

, et al. Thermally sprayable grafted LDPE/nanoclay composite coating for corrosion protection. Surf Coating Technol 2011; 205: 5470–5477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2011.06.022

68.

Bao

Gawne

Zhang

. Cure kinetics of flame-sprayed thermoset coatings. Surf Coating Technol 2012; 207: 89–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2012.06.007

69.

Chebbi

Stokes

Thermal

, et al. Thermal spraying of bioactive polymer coatings for orthopaedic applications. J Therm Spray Technol 2012; 21: 719–730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-012-9764-z

70.

Armada

Schmid

Equey

, et al. Liquid-solid self-lubricated coatings. J Therm Spray Technol 2013; 22: 10–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-012-9847-x

71.

Roberto

Lima

Angel

, et al. Slurry Erosion and corrosion behavior of some engineering polymers applied by low-pressure flame spray. J Mater Eng Perform 2016; 25: 4911–4918. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-016-2317-8

72.

Donadei

Koivuluoto

Sarlin

, et al. Lubricated icephobic coatings prepared by flame spraying with hybrid feedstock injection. Surf Coating Technol 2020; 403: 126396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2020.126396

73.

Varis

Donadei

Koivuluoto

, et al. The effect of mechanical and thermal stresses on the performance of lubricated icephobic coatings during cyclic icing/deicing tests. Prog Org Coating 2022; 163: 106614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2021.106614

74.

Man

Lin

Wang

. Role of well-dispersed carbon nanotubes and limited matrix degradation on tribological properties of flame-sprayed PEEK. Nanocomposite Coatings, J. Tribol 2022; 144: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4050733

75.

Zhang

Liao

, et al. Correlation of crystallization behavior and mechanical properties of thermal sprayed PEEK coating. Surf Coating Technol 2006; 200: 6690–6695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2005.10.006

76.

Soveja

Costil

Liao

, et al. Remelting of flame spraying PEEK coating using lasers. J Therm Spray Technol 2010; 19: 439–447. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-009-9421-3

77.

Liu

Shao

Huang

, et al. Flame sprayed environmentally friendly High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) capsaicin composite coatings for marine antifouling applications. Mater Lett 2019; 238: 46–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2018.11.144

78.

Vuoristo

Leivo

Turunen

, et al. Evaluation of thermally sprayed and other polymeric coatings for use in natural gas pipeline components. ASM Thermal Spray Society 2003; 83638: 1693–1702. https://doi.org/10.31399/asm.cp.itsc2003p1693

79.

Wang

Liu

Gong

, et al. Liquid flame spray fabrication of polyimide-copper coatings for antifouling applications. Mater Lett 2017; 190: 217–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2017.01.028

80.

Liu

Suo

, et al. Suspension flame spray construction of polyimide-copper layers for marine antifouling applications. J Therm Spray Technol 2018; 27(1): 98–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-017-0653-3

81.

Jia

Liu

Wang

, et al. Flame spray fabrication of polyethylene-Cu composite coatings with enwrapped structures: a new route for constructing antifouling layers. Surf Coating Technol 2017; 309: 872–879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2016.10.071

82.

Jia

Huang

Gong

, et al. Incorporation of copper enhances the anti-ageing property of flame-sprayed high-density polyethylene coatings. J Therm Spray Technol 2017; 26(3): 409–416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-017-0525-x

83.

Jothi

Santhoskumar

Amanulla

, et al. Thermally sprayable anti-corrosion marine coatings based on MAH-g-LDPE/UHMWPE nanocomposites. J Therm Spray Technol 2014; 23: 1413–1424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-014-0153-7

84.

Korobov

Belotserkovsky

Timofeev

, et al. Adhesive strength of flame sprayed polymer coatings. AIP Conference Proceedong 2016; 1785: 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4967032

85.

Kamnis

. Numerical modelling of in-flight particle dynamics of non-spherical powder. Surf Coating Technol 2009; 203(22): 3485–3490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2009.05.024

86.

Lal

Murtaza

Walia

, et al. Modelling and simulation of FSW of polycarbonate using finite element analysis. Mater Today Proc 2022; 50: 2424–2429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.10.260

87.

Zhang

Bao

Gawne

, et al. Effect of a moving flame on the temperature of polymer coatings and substrates. Prog Org Coating 2011; 70(1): 45–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2010.09.018

88.

Chu

Schultz

. The influence of microstructure on the failure behaviour of PEEK. J Mater Sci 1990; 25: 3746–3752. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00575414

89.

Ivosevic

Cairncross

Knight

. 3D predictions of thermally sprayed polymer splats: modeling particle acceleration, heating and deformation on impact with a flat substrate. Int J Heat Mass Tran 2006; 49: 3285–3297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2006.03.028

90.

Fardan

Berndt

Ahmed

. Numerical modelling of particle impact and residual stresses in cold sprayed coatings: a review. Surf Coating Technol 2021; 409: 126835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2021.126835

91.

Goyal

Walia

Sharma

, et al. Finite element modeling and analysis of powder stream in low pressure cold spray process. J Inst Eng: Series C 2016; 97(3): 331–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40032-016-0234-0

92.

Zeng

. Multiscale modeling and simulation of polymer nanocomposites. Prog Polym Sci 2008; 33: 191–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2007.09.002

93.

Lejars

Margaillan

Bressy

. Fouling release coatings: a nontoxic alternative to biocidal antifouling coatings. Chem Rev 2012; 112: 4347–4390. https://doi.org/10.1021/cr200350v

94.

Durr

Thomason

. Biofouling. 2010; 1–455. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444315462

95.

Schultz

. Effects of coating roughness and biofouling on ship resistance and powering. Biofouling 2007; 23: 331–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927010701461974

96.

Rascio

VJD

. Antifouling coatings: where do we go from here. Biol Sci 2000; 18: 133–154. https://doi.org/10.1515/corrrev.2000.18.2-3.133

97.

Hellio

Yebra

. Advances in marine antifouling coatings and technologies. Woodhead Publishing Ltd, 2009, p. 784.

98.

Evans

Leksono

McKinnell

. Tributyltin pollution: a diminishing problem following legislation limiting the use of TBT-Based anti-fouling paints. Mar Pollut Bull 1995; 30(1): 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-326X(94)00181-8

99.

Matyjaszewski

. Atom Transfer Radical Polymerization (ATRP): current status and future perspectives. Macromolecules 2012; 45(10): 4015–4039. https://doi.org/10.1021/ma3001719

100.

Lutz

. 1, 3-Dipolar cycloadditions of azides and alkynes: a universal ligation tool in polymer and materials science. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2007; 7: 1018–1025. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.200604050

101.

Hoyle

Bowman

. Bowman Thiol–ene click chemistry, Angewandte ChemieInternational edition. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2010; 49: 1540–1573. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.200903924

102.

Yang

Neoh

Kang

, et al. Polymer brush coatings for combating marine biofouling. Prog Polym Sci 2014; 39(5): 1017–1042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2014.02.002

103.

Ghosh

Nirmala

, et al. Development and application of fungistatic wrappers in food preservation. II. Wrappers made by coating process. Pascal-Francis Inist Fr 1977; 24: 261–264.

104.

Cha

Chinnan

. Biopolymer-based antimicrobial packaging: a review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2010; 44: 8398–9237. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408690490464276

105.

Weng

Hotchkiss

. Anhydrides as antimycotic agents added to polyethylene films for food packaging. Packag Technol Sci 1993; 6: 123–128. https://doi.org/10.1002/pts.2770060304

106.

Chung

Papadakis

Yam

. Release of propyl paraben from a polymer coating into water and food simulating solvents for antimicrobial packaging applications. J Food Process Preserv 2000; 25: 71–87. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4549.2001.tb00444.x

107.

Smith

Lamprou

. Polymer coatings for biomedical applications: a review. The International Journal of Surface Engineering and Coatings 2014; 92: 2967–3119. https://doi.org/10.1179/0020296713Z.000000000157

108.

Wei

Haag

. Universal polymer coatings and their representative biomedical applications. Mater Horiz 2015; 2(6): 567–577. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5MH00089K

109.

Chen

Liang

Thouas

. Elastomeric biomaterials for tissue engineering. Prog Polym Sci 2013; 38(3-4): 584–671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2012.05.003

110.

Croisier

Jérôme

. Chitosan-based biomaterials for tissue engineering. Eur Polym J 2013; 49(4): 780–792. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2012.12.009

111.

Kim

Park

Prausnitz

. Microneedles for drug and vaccine delivery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2012; 64(14): 1547–1568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2012.04.005

112.

McGrath

Vrdoljak

O’Mahony

, et al. Determination of parameters for successful spray coating of silicon microneedle arrays. Int J Pharm 2011; 415(1-2): 140–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2011.05.064

113.

Campbell

Breakspear

, et al. Conducting polymer coatings in electrochemical technology part 1-Synthesis and fundamental aspects, Transactions of the IMF, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1179/174591907X229671

114.

Pritchet

. One-component revision of failed hip resurfacing from adverse reaction to metal wear debris. J Arthroplast 2014; 29(1): 219–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2013.04.011

115.

Kirkland

. Magnesium biomaterials: past, present and future. Corrosion Eng Sci Technol 2012; 47(5): 322–328. https://doi.org/10.1179/1743278212Y.0000000034

116.

Çiftçi

Tamer

Teker

MŞ

, et al. An enzyme free potentiometric detection of glucose based on a conducting polymer poly (3-aminophenyl boronic acid-co-3-octylthiophene). Electrochim Acta 2013; 90: 358–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2012.12.019