MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799331282 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2016-0059

CONTACT STRESS AND RADIAL STIFFNESS OF A CYLINDRICAL ROLLER BEARING WITH CORRECTED ROLLER GENERATOR

2016· article· en· W2799331282 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Guanci Chen, Hailiang Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGear and Bearing Dynamics Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsStiffnessBearing (navigation)Generator (circuit theory)Materials scienceStructural engineeringStress (linguistics)Contact mechanicsCoupling (piping)MechanicsFinite element methodComposite materialPhysicsEngineeringPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method has been developed to study the radial stiffness of a cylindrical roller bearing with corrected roller generator. First, the finite-length contact question of roller-race contact was solved by cutting contact surface into slices and considering the influences among slices by a flexibility coefficient matrix, which was more accurate than the traditional method. Further, the more precise load-approach function of the contact of race and roller with corrected generator was determined. Then, the radial stiffness of a cylindrical roller bearing has been derived by coupling this load-approach function into a complete bearing mechanical model. Results show that the corrected roller generator has a great influence on the bearing radial stiffness. The maximum stiffness difference among the cases of straight and crowned generators is 28.7%. The bearing radial stiffness decreases rapidly with the rise of profile maximum deviation h max . It is worthy noting that there is a sudden change of stiffness with the adding of load when the bearing is with clearance.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.458
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.165 · 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
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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