MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058562166 · doi:10.1115/fedsm-icnmm2010-31047

Modeling the Forces Exerted on the Tool-Electrode During Spark Assisted Chemical Engraving Constant Velocity Feed-Drilling

2010· article· en· W2058562166 on OpenAlexafffund
Jana D. Abou Ziki, Nandkishor M. Dhawale, Rolf Wu ̈thrich

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Machining and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsElectrodeElectrolyteMaterials scienceMachiningAnodePotassium hydroxideCathodeComposite materialElectrical discharge machiningEngravingWorking electrodeMechanical engineeringAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Electrical engineeringChemical engineeringChemistryMetallurgyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spark Assisted Chemical Engraving (SACE) is an interesting technology for micro-machining several types of non-conductive materials like glass, quartz, polymers and some ceramics. The process takes place in an electrochemical cell with two electrodes immersed in an electrolyte. The electrolytic solution is typically sodium hydroxide (30%wt NaOH) or potassium hydroxide (KOH). The cathode is used as tool and the anode as counter-electrode. When the applied voltage is higher than a critical value (typically around 30V, depending on the electrolyte and tool-electrode geometry) bubbles grow so dense on the electrode surface that they coalesce into a gas film. Electrical discharges occur between the electrode and the electrolyte. Machining begins consequently if the electrode is placed close enough to the surface to be machined (typically 25μm for glass). In the present paper, the forces exerted on the tool-electrode during constant velocity feed drilling is investigated experimentally and a model is proposed. The setup is composed of a machine head mounted on XYZ precision linear stage holding the tool-electrode. The machining head further incorporates a force sensor which is able to monitor, during drilling operation, the force exerted on the tool-electrode based on the zero displacement measurement principle.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Machining and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207