MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2243483411 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2007-0020

EFFECT OF WHEEL WEAR ON CONTACT LENGTH, UNCUT CHIP THICKNESS AND FORCES FOR A DEFORMABLE GRINDING WHEEL AND WORKPIECE

2007· article· en· W2243483411 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Andrew Warkentin, Robert Bauer

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrindingMaterials scienceEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionChipChip formationGrinding wheelNormal forceComposite materialContact areaDynamometerWork (physics)Volume (thermodynamics)MechanicsMechanical engineeringMachiningTool wearMetallurgyEngineeringPhysicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, contact length, uncut chip thickness, and contact forces were studied as the wheel wore during dry surface grinding of 4130 normalized steel for three different depths of cut (0.0025, 0.005, 0.0075 mm). An aluminum oxide grinding wheel (Norton 38A46HVBE) was used for all the experiments and the work and wheel speeds were 0.22 and 32.3 m/s, respectively. In each experiment, the wear flat area, the cutting edge density, the cutting edge width and length were determined using an automated optical measurement system. The grinding forces were measured using a force dynamometer. The contact length was determined using rigid-body, smooth-body and rough-body contact assumptions. The uncut chip thickness was determined using a continuity analysis. In this approach, the average volume of material is first determined by dividing the total material removal rate by the number of cutting edges. Then an assumption of the shape of the chip is made. In this work, the uncut chip was assumed to have a triangular profile and a rectangular cross-section. The uncut chip thickness can then be determined by dividing the average chip volume by the average contact length and chip width. In the experiments, grinding forces, wear flat area, cutting edge density increased and uncut chip thickness decreased as a result of wheel wear. In addition, the wheel wear increased the contact length significantly in the rough-body assumption, marginally in the smooth-body. assumption but not in the rigid-body assumption. The normal contact pressure was determined by dividing the normal force by the product of the percent wear flat area and contact area. This result suggested that the rough body assumption represented the data most accurately.

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 score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207