MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112050740 · doi:10.1115/1.2338648

Analysis of the Chatter Instability in a Nonlinear Model for Drilling

2006· article· en· W2112050740 on OpenAlexafffund
Sue Ann Campbell, Emily Stone

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNonlinear systemBifurcationInstabilityVibrationStability (learning theory)Hopf bifurcationDrillingWork (physics)CriticalityControl theory (sociology)Deep hole drillingStructural engineeringEngineeringMathematicsMechanicsGeologyComputer sciencePhysicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we present stability analysis of a non-linear model for chatter vibration in a drilling operation. The results build our previous work [Stone, E., and Askari, A., 2002, “Nonlinear Models of Chatter in Drilling Processes,” Dyn. Syst., 17(1), pp. 65–85 and Stone, E., and Campbell, S. A., 2004, “Stability and Bifurcation Analysis of a Nonlinear DDE Model for Drilling,” J. Nonlinear Sci., 14(1), pp. 27–57], where the model was developed and the nonlinear stability of the vibration modes as cutting width is varied was presented. Here we analyze the effect of varying cutting depth. We show that qualitatively different stability lobes are produced in this case. We analyze the criticality of the Hopf bifurcation associated with loss of stability and show that changes in criticality can occur along the stability boundary, resulting in extra periodic solutions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.226 · 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.

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

Citations10
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational and Nonlinear DynamicsSame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207