MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2589741380

Delamination Studies in Drilling of GFRP Composites by using Taguchi Method

2013· article· en· W2589741380 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tom Sunny, Jalumedi Babu

Bibliographic record

VenueMechanical Engineering Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelamination (geology)Fibre-reinforced plasticDrillingTaguchi methodsMaterials scienceOrthogonal arrayComposite numberComposite materialDrillMachiningGlass fiberComposite laminatesFiber pull-outStructural engineeringEngineeringGeologyMetallurgy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) composite materials are one of the economically important alternatives to engineering materials due to their superior properties. Usually, drilling operation using twist drill is an important mechanical machining process for GFRP composite components. However, drilling operation is hard to carry out due to drilling-induced delamination. To increase drilling efficiency of GFRP composite laminates with the least waste and damages, it is essential to understand the drilling behavior by conducting a large number of drilling experiments and drilling parameters such as feed rate and spindle speed should be optimized. This paper presents delamination study of composite materials by conducting drilling experiments using Taguchi's L 25 , 5-level orthogonal array and Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to analyze the data obtained from the experiments and finally determine the optimal drilling parameters in drilling GFRP composite materials. Experiments were also conducted to determine whether varying feed&spindle speed during drilling could reduce the delamination.

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)0.001
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 score0.694
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.326 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMechanical Engineering ResearchSame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207