Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work reports on a numerical study undertaken to investigate the imbalance response of a rigid rotor supported by squeeze-film dampers. Two types of damper configurations were considered, namely, dampers without centering springs, and eccentrically operated dampers with centering springs. For a rotor fitted with squeeze-film dampers without centering springs, the study revealed the existence of three regimes of chaotic motion. The route to chaos in the first regime was attributed to a sequence of period-doubling bifurcations of the period-1 (synchronous) rotor response. A period-3 (one-third subharmonic) rotor whirl orbit, which was born from a saddle-node bifurcation, was found to co-exist with the chaotic attractor. The period-3 orbit was also observed to undergo a sequence of period-doubling bifurcations resulting in chaotic vibrations of the rotor. The route to chaos in the third regime of chaotic rotor response, which occurred immediately after the disappearance of the period-3 orbit due to a saddle-node bifurcation, was attributed to a possible boundary crisis. The transitions to chaotic vibrations in the rotor supported by eccentric squeeze-film dampers with centering springs were via the period-doubling cascade and type 3 intermittency routes. The type 3 intermittency transition to chaos was due to an inverse period-doubling bifurcation of the period-2 (one-half subharmonic) rotor response. The unbalance response of the squeeze-film-damper supported rotor presented in this work leads to unique non-synchronous and chaotic vibration signatures. The latter provide some useful insights into the design and development of fault diagnostic tools for rotating machinery that operate in highly nonlinear regimes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".