MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087816063 · doi:10.1115/imece2006-13949

Control of the Clad Height in Laser Powder Deposition Process Using a PID Controller

2006· article· en· W2087816063 on OpenAlexaff
Alireza Fathi, Mohammad Durali, Ehsan Toyserkani, Amir Khajepour

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPID controllerControl theory (sociology)Nonlinear systemProcess controlController (irrigation)Process (computing)Laser power scalingLaserPower (physics)Materials scienceControl engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringTemperature controlOpticsControl (management)PhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laser Powder Deposition (LPD) process is an advanced material processing technique which has many applications. Despite this fact, reliable and accurate control schemes have not yet fully developed for the process. In this paper, the problem of controlling the clad height in the LPD process is studied. Due to a faster response of the process to change in scanning velocity over the laser power, the scanning velocity is selected as the input control variable. Since the governing equations of the LPD process are complex for designing a controller, an identified nonlinear dynamic model is used. The model is a Hammerstein model with a linear dynamic and a nonlinear memoryless block. The model parameters are identified offline using experimental data. The controller has a proportional-integral-derivation (PID) architecture. The controller was implemented on the real plant to asses its performance in the fabrication of several metallic parts composed of stainless steel.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations6
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Control Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207