MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334852712 · doi:10.1115/imece2012-85958

Design and Optimization of a Cylindrical Voice Coil Actuator for the Synchronized Segmentally Interchanging Pulley Transmission System (SSIPTS)

2012· article· en· W2334852712 on OpenAlexaff
Vahid Mashatan, Jean W. Zu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVibration and Dynamic Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActuatorVoice coilPulleyElectromagnetic coilFinite element methodComputer scienceKey (lock)Transmission (telecommunications)Optimal designMechanical engineeringControl engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineeringStructural engineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents design, modeling, and optimization methodologies for an electromagnetic actuator for the synchronized segmentally interchanging pulley transmission system (SSIPTS). The overall design of SSIPTS and its principle of operation introduce very challenging and conflicting design requirements. The actuators must be very small in size and as light as possible while they need to produce very high force linearly along the stroke. Since no commercial actuator is able to meet all the design requirements of SSIPTS, a novel actuator must be designed for this application. Based on the prior state of the art and literature surveys on actuator technologies and the performance requirements, it has been concluded that voice coil actuator (VCA) technology is the best candidate. VCA is modeled for this application, and the key design parameters have been defined. Further, geometry mapping optimization and FEM analysis have been conducted to determine the optimized values for the key design parameters. Based on the simulation results and FEM analysis, the optimized VCA is shaped. This design of VCA meets the design requirements of SSIPTS.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score0.221

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.205 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVibration and Dynamic AnalysisFrench-language works237,207