MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Correcting for the Influence of Bulk Compressibility on the Design Properties of Elastomeric Bearings

2014· article· en· W1988734502 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 Engineering Mechanics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Engineering and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompressibilityCompression (physics)ModulusBulk modulusBendingMaterials scienceElastomerBending stiffnessMechanicsComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The compression and bending modulus of elastomeric bearings, commonly applied as vibration isolators, are important design considerations. Analytical solutions have demonstrated that the sensitivity to the compressibility of the elastomer can be significant and begins at relatively low shape factors. These analytical solutions, which include the effects of compressibility on the compression and bending modulus, are often complex and not suitable for design purposes. Alternatively, an ad hoc approximation has been recommended that expresses the compression and bending modulus, including the compressibility of the elastomer, by assuming incompressibility and correcting with the bulk modulus. It is demonstrated that the ad hoc approximation provides an unconservatively large value of the compression and bending modulus for infinite strip, square, circular, and annular pad geometries. A correction factor to the ad hoc approximation is determined by expanding and simplifying the analytical solutions. The proposed approximations typically reduce the magnitude of the error while also providing a conservatively lower estimate of the compression and bending modulus.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.178 · 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