MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970064874 · doi:10.1115/1.4005429

A New Mechanistic Approach for Micro End Milling Force Modeling

2012· article· en· W1970064874 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Byung‐Guk Jun, Chan-Seo Goo, Mohammad Malekian, Simon Park

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRubbingRake angleEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionEnd millingRakeMaterials scienceShearing (physics)Root mean squareShear forceRADIUSContact forceBreakageMechanicsMechanical engineeringComposite materialComputer scienceEngineeringMachiningPhysicsMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the mechanistic modeling of micro end milling forces, with consideration of the effects of plowing, elastic recovery, effective rake angle, and flank face rubbing. Two different mechanistic models are developed for shearing- and plowing-dominant regimes. Micro end milling experiments are conducted to validate the model for Aluminum 6061; and, the model appropriately predicts force profiles for a wide range of feed rates, and prediction of the root mean square (RMS) values of the resultant forces is, on average, within a 12% error. The study of the model shows that plowing and rubbing force contributions are significant, especially at low feed rates. The edge radius is found to have a significant effect on plowing and rubbing force components and the effective rake angle, which indicates that it is important to maintain a low edge radius to reduce micro end milling forces.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations63
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Manufacturing Science and EngineeringSame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207