MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150342510 · doi:10.1115/1.2958079

Nonlinear Dynamic Behavior of a Rigid Rotor Supported by Hydrostatic Squeeze Film Dampers

2008· article· en· W2150342510 on OpenAlexafffund
Ahmed Bouzidane, Marc Thomas, A. A. Lakis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Tribology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTribology and Lubrication Engineering
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNonlinear systemHydrostatic equilibriumDamperVibrationMechanicsEccentricity (behavior)Rigid rotorRotor (electric)Hydrostatic pressureBearing (navigation)Structural engineeringMaterials scienceControl theory (sociology)EngineeringPhysicsMechanical engineeringComputer scienceAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This research project aims to study the nonlinear dynamic behavior of a rigid rotor supported by hydrostatic squeeze film dampers (HSFDs). The investigated HSFD consists of four hydrostatic bearing flat pads fed by capillary restrictors. A nonlinear hydrostatic squeeze film damper model is developed, and the results are compared with those obtained using a linear approach. The effect of unbalance eccentricity on the vibration response and the transmitted force of the HSFD are investigated using the linear and nonlinear models. The results show good agreement between the linear and nonlinear methods when the unbalance force is small. However, as the unbalance forces become larger, the results obtained using the linear models cease to be representative of the real behavior of rotor dynamics and a nonlinear approach must be conducted. The effects of supply pressure, viscosity, pressure ratio, and rotational speed on the response and the force transmitted to the HSFD are investigated using a nonlinear approach.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.526
Threshold uncertainty score0.576

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 head0.226
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of TribologySame topicTribology and Lubrication EngineeringFrench-language works237,207