Design optimization of magnetorheological fluid valves using response surface method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new design optimization methodology for the optimal design of a single-coil annular magnetorheological valve constrained in a specific volume inside a magnetorheological damper has been presented in this article. The methodology combines the finite element model, with the design of experiments and response surface techniques in order to develop approximate response surface functions for the magnetic field intensity across the activation length of a magnetorheological valve orifice with respect to identified design variables. The accuracy of the developed response surface functions over the entire design space has been verified. The developed analytical response functions have then been used in Bingham plastic model, which is based on the steady behavior of a magnetorheological fluid in order to derive the field-dependent performance functions of the magnetorheological damper, which can be effectively used in the design optimization problems. The design optimization problem has been formulated for single- and multiobjective performance functions using sequential quadratic programming technique and the genetic algorithm to find the global optimum geometrical parameters of the magnetorheological valve. Finally, a proportional–integral–derivative controller has been designed to evaluate the closed-loop performance of the optimally designed magnetorheological valve confined in a magnetorheological damper used in a quarter-car suspension model.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".