Effects of knife jointing and wear on the planed surface quality of sugar maple wood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jointing is a common practice required to produce the same cutting circle for all knives mounted in a cutterhead of a peripheral knife planer.Initially the jointed land at the cutting edge has a 0 degree clearance angle, which becomes negative with the workpiece motion relative to the cutterhead and as the cutting edge wears.Jointed knives could crush a thin layer of the planed board and affect the wood quality and performance.Sugar maple wood gluing properties were evaluated in samples that had been planed using one of four jointed land widths, each tested at four states of wear.With increased jointed land and planing length, the damage to the surface and subsurface of wood increased, but the gluing strength and percent wood failure decreased.The depth of this damaged layer was positively correlated with the magnitude of the normal cutting force.In samples where moisture content had fluctuated, the effects of jointing and wear on gluing were more pronounced.The results suggest that a jointed land of 0.9 mm may be used as maximum allowable width for planing sugar maple wood.Also, the planed surface quality of this wood may be negatively affected using a knife with 45 km of rake face recession and 60 krn of clearance face recession, which results in a damaged layer 0.20 mm thick.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".