MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2551840453 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2015-0058

DEFECT IMPROVEMENT OF EXTRUSION DIES USING COMBINATION OF FEM STRESS ANALYSIS WITH THE TAGUCHI METHOD

2015· article· en· W2551840453 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kao-Hua Chang, Ching-Wei Shih, Gow Yi Tzou

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetallurgy and Material Forming
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDie (integrated circuit)Taguchi methodsExtrusionFinite element methodCore (optical fiber)Stress (linguistics)Tungsten carbideMaterials scienceService lifeStructural engineeringMechanical engineeringComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims at analyzing the influence of the maximum principal stress on Tungsten Carbide Steel die core in an extrusion die which caused the crack of die core, and then adjusts the dies assembly method in order to improve the service life of die. In this study, we combine FEM simulation software with the Taguchi Method L9(34) to choose the cobalt content for die core materials, and the quantity of shrink fit while assembling the die core and die case as the reference parameters. When carrying out the simulation process, we compared the changes of the maximum principal stress of the die core caused by the plastic deformation of die materials to achieve the minimum expected value as the goal for the most optimal die combination. Then, the results obtained are to make dies in trial and mass-production practically; as a result, the die life is improved from the original 1000 to 150,000 pcs, which is more than 150 times better than before.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicMetallurgy and Material FormingFrench-language works237,207