MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050235330 · doi:10.1115/detc2011-47914

Decoupling of the Cartesian Stiffness Matrix: A Case Study on Accelerometer Design

2011· article· en· W2050235330 on OpenAlexafffund
Ting Zou, Jorge Angeles

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 7: 5th International Conference on Micro- and Nanosystems; 8th International Conference on Design and Design Education; 21st Reliability, Stress Analysis, and Failure Prevention Conference · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsCartesian coordinate systemStiffnessStiffness matrixDirect stiffness methodDecoupling (probability)Eigenvalues and eigenvectorsFinite element methodDiscretizationMathematicsBlock matrixMatrix (chemical analysis)Mathematical analysisGeometryStructural engineeringEngineeringPhysicsMaterials scienceControl engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 6 × 6 Cartesian stiffness matrix obtained through finite element analysis for structures designed with material and geometric symmetries may lead to unexpected coupling that stems from discretization error. Hence, decoupling of the Cartesian stiffness matrix becomes essential for design and analysis. This paper reports a numerical method for decoupling the Cartesian stiffness matrix, based on screw theory. With the aid of this method, the translational and rotational stiffness matrices can be analyzed independently. The mechanical properties of the decoupled stiffness submatrices are investigated via their associated eigenvalue analyses. The decoupling technique is applied to the design of two accelerometer layouts, uniaxial and biaxial, with what the authors term simplicial architectures. The decoupled stiffness matrices reveal acceptable compliance along the sensitive axes and high off-axis stiffness.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 7: 5th International Conference on Micro- and Nanosystems; 8th International Conference on Design and Design Education; 21st Reliability, Stress Analysis, and Failure Prevention ConferenceSame topicDynamics and Control of Mechanical SystemsFrench-language works237,207