MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977845597 · doi:10.1115/1.4006836

Volumetric Modeling and Experimental Validation of Normal Contact Dynamic Forces

2012· article· en· W1977845597 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContact forceStiffnessContact dynamicsFinite element methodMechanicsContact mechanicsMaterials scienceStructural engineeringEngineeringClassical mechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A volumetric contact dynamics model has been proposed for the purpose of generating reliable and rapid simulations of contact dynamics. Forces and moments between bodies in contact can be expressed in terms of the volume of interference between the undeformed geometries. This allows for the modeling of contact between complex geometries and relatively large contact surfaces, while being computationally less expensive than finite element methods. However, the volumetric model requires experimental validation. Models for simple geometries in contact have been developed for stationary and dynamic contact, and an apparatus has been developed to experimentally validate these models. This paper focuses on validation of the normal contact models. Measurements of forces and displacements will be used to identify the parameters related to the normal force, i.e., the volumetric stiffness and hysteretic damping factor for metallic surfaces. The experimental measurements are compared with simulated results to assess the validity of the volumetric model.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.220 · 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