MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004153258 · doi:10.4273/ijvss.3.1.03

Brake Squeal - Modeling and Experimental Investigation Using a Work Criterion

2011· article· en· W2004153258 on OpenAlex
Utz von Wagner, Holger Gödecker, Stefan Schlagner

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

VenueInternational Journal of Vehicle Structures and Systems · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBrake Systems and Friction Analysis
Canadian institutionsBombardier (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrakeDisc brakeWork (physics)Automotive industryBrake padProcess (computing)Mechanism (biology)EngineeringContact forcePoint (geometry)Control theory (sociology)Phase (matter)Mechanical engineeringAutomotive engineeringComputer sciencePhysicsMathematicsClassical mechanicsArtificial intelligenceAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Squealing automotive brakes are usually not accepted by customers. However, squealing is an omnipresent phenomenon in disc brakes at least in certain operation states. During the development process of new brakes, engineers succeed more or less in covering this phenomenon with tools like using shims, modifying the structure or varying the mounted pads. In 2002 Popp et al. [1] described the pre-conditions for positive work of the friction forces (i.e. excitation of squeal) based on a very simple model. The essential point in this model is a phase shift between the in-plane movement of the pad and the friction force. In [2] it was shown that it is possible to suppress actively brake squeal using this approach. Active pads with integrated piezoceramics were used as actuators. The authors of the present paper use multi body brake models for the investigation of the origin of the excitation mechanism by observing the work per period of the friction forces and comparing the results with the classic stability analysis. A measurement technique based on these theoretical investigations is developed for detecting parameter regions (e.g. for the brake pressure and corresponding squealing frequencies) which are suspicious for squeal. Considering two models of the brake, phase shifts between signals and measuring the work of the nonconservative forces are considered with respect to the question of detecting the tendency to squeal. Based on these theoretical results measurement procedures are developed and tested at test rigs at TU Berlin and TU Darmstadt. The results of this procedure coincide with results of state of the art experimental investigations but can be performed much faster. This new procedure yields even more significant results than the ones described in [2].

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.437
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.210 · 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