MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994946750 · doi:10.1088/0964-1726/17/1/015049

Quasi-static thermo-electro-mechanical behaviour of piezoelectric stack actuators

2008· article· en· W1994946750 on OpenAlexaff
Faxin Li, R. K. N. D. Rajapakse, David Mumford, Mohamed S. Gadala

Bibliographic record

VenueSmart Materials and Structures · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicFerroelectric and Piezoelectric Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials sciencePiezoelectricityActuatorElectric fieldDielectricNonlinear systemStack (abstract data type)Displacement (psychology)Atmospheric temperature rangeComposite materialMechanicsAcousticsElectrical engineeringThermodynamicsOptoelectronicsEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quasi-static thermo-electro-mechanical performance of annular and solid cylindrical piezoelectric actuators was studied by experimental means under electric fields varying from 0.3 to 1.8 kV mm −1 with a preload of 4.6 MPa over the temperature range of −30 to 125 °C. It was found that, for both annular and solid actuators, the electrically induced stroke increases steadily with temperature. Under electric fields larger than 1.0 kV mm −1 , a nonlinear transition zone exists in the stroke–temperature plot over the temperature range 25–50 °C. The dielectric constant was also found to increase with temperature. Preload dependence of displacement was measured up to 42 MPa at room temperature and found to be negligible below 30 MPa. A mathematical model that includes the linear piezoelectric effect and 90° domain switching effect was used to model the experimental results. The model shows reasonable agreement with experimental results at low and high driving fields.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.235
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

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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations53
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSmart Materials and StructuresSame topicFerroelectric and Piezoelectric MaterialsFrench-language works237,207