MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587288256 · doi:10.1115/imece2016-67064

Analysis and Optimization of Robotized Grinding of Titanium High Pressure Compressor Blades

2016· article· en· W2587288256 on OpenAlexaff
Mouhab Meshreki, Z. Shi, F. Arrien, Helmi Attia

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsAV&R (Canada)National Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVibrationNatural frequencyGas compressorGrindingGrinding wheelMechanical engineeringEngineeringAerospaceActuatorProcess (computing)RobotRotational speedGrindAcousticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAerospace engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An analysis for a robotized grinding process of aerospace Titanium high pressure compressor blades was performed. In this process, the blade was grabbed on the robotic arm. A Scotch-Brite grinding wheel, on a pneumatic actuator, was used to grind the edges of the blades. The objective of this research work was to identify the major factors that influence the accuracy of the process and the final part quality. This objective was achieved by analyzing the dynamic characteristics of the wheel grabbed on the motor as well as analyzing the dynamic characteristics of the blade grabbed on the robotic arm. The frequency response functions (FRF) were identified at different robot configurations and positions. In addition, the vibrations of the various system components during the grinding process were monitored and analyzed to determine the effect of the speed on the relative vibrations between the workpiece and the wheel. Considering the dynamics of the wheel and the motor, rotational speed ranges were recommended. It was found that the vibrations of the grinding process were higher at two ranges: The first corresponds to the first natural frequency of the robot and the second corresponds to the first natural frequency of the wheel and the second natural frequency of the robot. By avoiding these ranges, part quality within the specified tolerances was obtained.

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 score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

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 head0.205
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207