MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803652912 · doi:10.5267/j.ijiec.2017.10.001

Machining performance of aluminium matrix composite and use of WPCA based Taguchi technique for multiple response optimization

2018· article· en· W2803652912 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Diptikanta Das, Purna Chandra Mishra, Saranjit Singh, A.K. Chaubey, Bharat Chandra Routara

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Machining and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTaguchi methodsMaterials scienceMachiningTungsten carbideSurface roughnessComposite numberSilicon carbideAluminiumMetallurgyCarbideComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Silicon carbide (SiC) particulate impregnated Al 7075 matrix composite was fabricated by stir casting method and then heat treated to T6 condition. It was then machined with multiple layer of TiN coated tungsten carbide (WC) inserts in dry environment and pollution free Spray Impingement Cooling (SIC) environment to compare the machining performance. SIC environment presented better machining performance with respect to cutting tool temperature (T), average roughness of the machined surface (Ra) and tool flank wear (VBc). Quadratic response surface models were developed by computing the experimental data. Weighted Principal Component Analysis (WPCA) based Taguchi technique was adopted to optimize the multiple responses simultaneously, which resulted 40 m/min of cutting speed (V), 0.05 mm/rev of feed (f) and 0.2 mm of cutting depth (d) was the optimal combination of process parameters.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering ComputationsSame topicAdvanced Machining and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207