MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Derivation of Design Requirements for Optimization of a High Performance Hydrostatic Actuation System

2000· article· en· W1966675577 on OpenAlexaff
Saeid Habibi, Gurwinder Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Fluid Power · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfitability indexActuatorReliability engineeringQuality (philosophy)Set (abstract data type)Component (thermodynamics)Cost reductionEngineeringComputer scienceControl engineeringSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The competitive global market dictates greater quality of product models produced at lower cost and in shorter duration. During the past two decades, the efficiency of production processes and the quality of products have been differentiating factors in establishing competitive advantage in mature industries such as fluid power. The survival of such industries is increasingly dependent on their ability of optimizing their component characteristics as well as integrating these in complex subsystems. Reduction of cost of poor quality is thus critical. This cost often originates from inadequate or sub-optimal design requirements. Mature industries involved in the design and production of complex systems, have recognized the importance of design requirements definition in reducing cost and increasing profitability.This paper considers linking of system requirements to design parameters for a high performance actuation system referred to as the Electro Hydraulic Actuator (EHA). EHA is based on the hydrostatic actuation concept. It has been prototyped and has demonstrated a very high level of performance. The mathematical model of EHA is reviewed and used for linking its performance to its design parameters through a set of mathematical functions. The actual and expected performances of the prototype are compared in order to validate the proposed mathematical functions and an improved design is proposed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Fluid PowerSame topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207