MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800296947 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2011-0002

THE DESIGN OF EDDY-CURRENT MAGNET BRAKES

2011· article· en· W2800296947 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Der-Ming Ma, Jaw-Kuen Shiau

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMagnetic Bearings and Levitation Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEddy current brakeEddy currentMagnetic fieldMagnetAutomotive engineeringConstant currentComputer scienceCurrent (fluid)Mechanical engineeringEngineeringControl theory (sociology)Electrical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The eddy-current is created by the relative motion between a magnet and a metal (or alloy) conductor. The current induces the reverse magnetic field and results in the deceleration of motion. The proposed mechanism implements this phenomenon in developing a braking system. The potential applications of the braking system can be a decelerating system to increase the safety of an elevator or any guided rail transportation system. To provide scientific investigation for industrial application of magnetic braking, this study presents four systematic engineering design scenarios to design a braking system. The constant magnetic field is the simplest and easiest design to implement. The optimal magnetic field distribution is obtained by minimizing the deceleration effort. The piecewise-constant magnetic field distribution offers a compromise between performance and magnetic field requirements. The advantages of the section-wise guide rail are tolerable deceleration; and simple design requirement and manufacturing processes. In the study, an experimental braking system using constant magnetic field is build to demonstrate the design procedure.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations22
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicMagnetic Bearings and Levitation DynamicsFrench-language works237,207