MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982427191 · doi:10.3139/217.1692

Design Sensitivity Analysis Applied to Injection Molding for Optimization of Gate Location and Injection Pressure

2002· article· en· W1982427191 on OpenAlexaff
Kalonji K. Kabanemi, J.‐F. Hétu, A. Derdouri

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Polymer Processing · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInjection Molding Process and Properties
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)Sequential quadratic programmingFinite element methodOptimal designMathematical optimizationRobustness (evolution)Materials scienceQuadratic programmingControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceMathematicsEngineeringStructural engineeringElectronic engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this work, we develop a numerical simulation method to optimize the injection molding process using the design sensitivity analysis (DSA). The optimization concerns the filling stage and focuses on the location of gates in the mold cavity as well as the injection pressure profile, in order to minimize the fill time. Since the problem to be solved involves transient flow with free surface (flow front), the direct differentiation method is used to evaluate the sensitivities of the Hele-Shaw, filling fraction and energy equations with respect to the design variables used in the analysis. The search domain parameterization is coped with using B-spline functions. Sensitivity and state equations are solved by means of finite element method. The proposed numerical approach is combined with the sequential linear and quadratic programming method of the design optimization tools (DOT) to find new design variables at the end of each complete filling simulation. Starting from any initial gate locations and injection pressure profile, the iterative optimization procedure enables us to find the optimal gate locations together with the optimal injection pressure profile. Finally, numerical results involving complex mold geometries are presented and discussed to assess the validity and robustness of the proposed method.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinghigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Methods
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinghigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical · Methods

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

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Polymer ProcessingSame topicInjection Molding Process and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207