MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982810929 · doi:10.1115/1.4003520

A New Analytical Formulation for the Dynamics of Multipocket Thin-Walled Structures Considering the Fixture Constraints

2011· article· en· W1982810929 on OpenAlexafffund
Mouhab Meshreki, Helmi Attia, József Kövecses

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityNational Research Council Canada
FundersNational Research Council CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsFixtureAerospaceFinite element methodComputationReduction (mathematics)Process (computing)Computer scienceStructural engineeringMechanical engineeringEngineeringAlgorithmMathematicsAerospace engineeringGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Milling of thin-walled aerospace structures is a critical and challenging process. Available models for the prediction of the effect of the fixture on the dynamic response of flexible workpieces are computationally demanding and fail to represent practical cases for milling of thin-walled structures. Based on the analysis of typical structural components encountered in the aerospace industry, a generalized unit-element, with the shape of an asymmetric pocket, was identified to represent the dynamic response of these components. Accordingly, a computationally efficient dynamic model was developed to predict the dynamic response of typical thin-walled aerospace structures using the Rayleigh–Ritz method. In the formulation of this model, the dynamics of a 3D pocket is represented by an equivalent 2D multispan plate taking into account the effect of deformable fixture supports. The developed model was validated numerically and experimentally for different workpiece geometries and various types of loading. This model resulted in one to two orders of magnitude reduction in computation time when compared with the finite element models, with prediction errors less than 10%. The developed model meets the conflicting requirements of prediction accuracy and computational efficiency needed for interactive fixture design.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations25
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Manufacturing Science and EngineeringSame topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207