Shell element simulation of the push method of tube bending
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
Purpose: In this paper the new push bending process for the forming of curved tubes is simulated using the finite element method. It is demonstrated that the results obtained using shell elements compare closely with those obtained earlier using three-dimensional elements. A parametric study is carried out which gives on indication of the effect of changes in geometry and material properties on results. Design/methodology/approach: A non-linear finite element analysis is carried out using the program LSDYNA. A bilinear elastic plastic material is assumed, and both aluminum and steel are modelled. Findings: It is found that the radius of the bend is significant with respect to potential wrinkling. The inner pressure can be increased to suppress possible wrinkling. Lubrication is shown to be significant with regard to final results for wall thickness. Research limitations/implications: The present work is restricted to quasi-static behavior, and thermal effects are not considered. Practical implications: Some limitation on thickness variation in the finished product is possible through choice of lubricant. Originality/value: This paper gives original simulated results for tube push bending relating to new geometries and different materials.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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