MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081155466 · doi:10.1115/1.2738961

An Experimental Evaluation of an Atomization-Based Cutting Fluid Application System for Micromachining

2008· article· en· W2081155466 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Byung‐Guk Jun, Suhas S. Joshi, Richard E. DeVor, Shiv G. Kapoor

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
KeywordsCutting fluidViscosityMaterials scienceSurface tensionMechanical engineeringSurface micromachiningPetroleum engineeringComposite materialMachiningGeologyMetallurgyEngineeringFabricationThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An atomization-based cutting fluid application system is developed for micro-end milling. The system was designed to ensure spreading of the droplets on the workpiece surface based on the analysis of the atomized droplet impingement dynamics. The results of the initial experiments conducted to examine the viability of the system show that the cutting forces are lower and tool life is significantly improved with the atomized cutting fluids when compared to dry and flood cooling methods. Also, application of atomized cutting fluid is found to result in good chip evacuation and lower cutting temperature. Experiments were also conducted to study the effect of fluid properties on cutting performance, and the results show that cutting fluids with lower surface tension and higher viscosity perform better in terms of cutting forces.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations112
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Manufacturing Science and EngineeringSame topicFluid Dynamics and Heat TransferFrench-language works237,207