MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2262115992 · doi:10.4271/2010-01-0380

An Experimental Study Investigating the Influence of the Number of Blades in a Cutter Used in Axial Cutting of AA6061-T6 and T4 Round Tubes

2010· article· en· W2262115992 on OpenAlexaff
Shun Yi Jin, William Altenhof

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE International Journal of Materials and Manufacturing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTribology and Lubrication Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanical engineeringStructural engineeringEngineeringMaterials scienceEngineering drawingComputer scienceAutomotive engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">Quasi-static axial cutting of AA6061-T6 and T4 round extrusions were completed using a specially designed cutter with multiple blades. The round specimens had a length of 200 mm, a nominal outer diameter of 50.8 mm, and a wall thickness of 3.175 mm or 1.587 mm. Four different cutters, constructed from heat-treated 4140 steel, having 3, 4, 5 and 6 blades on each cutter with a nominal tip width of 1.0 mm were used to penetrate through the round extrusions. A clean cutting mode was observed for the AA6061-T6 and T4 extrusions with wall thickness of 3.175 mm with an almost constant steady state cutting force. A braided cutting mode was observed for extrusions with both tempers with wall thickness of 1.587 mm, which resulted in a slightly oscillating steady state cutting force. For all extrusions with a wall thickness of 3.175 mm, the steady state cutting force increased with an increase in the number of cutter blades. To better understand the influence of the number of cutter blades on the steady state cutting force and energy absorption characteristics of extrusions, a numerical model was developed and simulated using LS-DYNA® employing an Eulerian finite element formulation to overcome numerical instabilities associated with massive mesh distortion. Good predictive capabilities of the developed numerical model were observed and were important towards the understanding of the contribution of deformation mechanisms and friction towards the force/displacement response of the extrusions in the cutting deformation mode.</div></div>

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 score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE International Journal of Materials and ManufacturingSame topicTribology and Lubrication EngineeringFrench-language works237,207