MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795917378 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2016-0081

THE ENGINEERING DESIGN AND TRANSMISSION EFFICIENCY VERIFICATION OF HELICAL SPUR GEAR TRANSMISSION WITH A SINGLE GEAR PAIR

2016· article· en· W2795917378 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Long–Chang Hsieh, Tzu-Hsia Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGear and Bearing Dynamics Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Council
KeywordsReducerTransmission (telecommunications)Gear ratioSpurSpur gearNon-circular gearSpiral bevel gearGear trainMechanical engineeringComputer scienceStructural engineeringEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transmission efficiency of a gear reducer (η T ) can be expressed as η T = η m × η b × η s , where η m is the meshing efficiency of gear pairs, η b is the efficiency of bearings, and η s is efficiency of oil seals. Based on the research of Hsieh, et al., the meshing efficiencies of a helical spur gear pair (4, 77) are between 96.13 and 99.20%. The purpose of this article is to analyze the theoretical transmission efficiencies of non-standard helical spur gear pair and verify the theorem. According to the gear data, the theoretical transmission efficiencies are calculated to be 90.13–97.85%. And its test values of transmission efficiencies are between 82.3 and 91.9% (acceptable values). There are only 5.39–14.14% errors between these two values. This manuscript verifies that a helical spur gear pair can have a high reduction ratio (20–30) and acceptable real transmission efficiencies.

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 score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.163 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicGear and Bearing Dynamics AnalysisFrench-language works237,207