Non-Traditional Forming Limit Diagrams for Incremental Forming
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although not standard, Forming Limit Diagrams, FLD’s, are used throughout the automotive industry as a preliminary tool to determine if a sheet metal forming process is capable of forming a good part. FLD’s show a limited range of strains on the diagram; typically the range is 0 to 1 on the major strain axis. A new rapid prototyping process called Single Pont Incremental Forming, SPIF, experiences strains over 3. As FLD’s do not typically cover that level of strain, a new method for developing FLD’s is needed. Such a method is proposed in this paper. Research has been conducted with five different shapes, formed using Single Point Incremental Forming. The part shapes utilized contain the most common combinations of angles and curves observed in formed sheet metal products. The strains encountered in forming each of these parts are measured and the strain data is then plotted on the same FLD. These new FLD’s can then be utilized as a predictive tool for engineers to determine if their design can be produced using the SPIF process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it