MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W29493174

Frequency response of hydraulic hoses

2002· article· en· W29493174 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jan Hölcke

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic and Pneumatic Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluid powerComputer scienceEngineeringEnvironmental scienceMechanical engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hoses can be components of fluid power control systems. To determine the dynamic behaviour of such systems you need to know the dynamic properties of the components included. This investigation aims to develop a method to determine these properties of hoses. Nitrile-black-carbon is used in hydraulic hoses. A literature study gives that rubber is a very complex material. It is viscoelastic with a lot of non-linearities so it is not self-evident how to model the hose. Four different models are studied. One of them gives an idea of the static relation between the rubber tube and the reinforcing. Two of them take the dynamic properties of rubber into account. The fourth model is a second order black box model. Laboratory tests have been done. The relationship between pressure changes and volume changes in hydraulic hoses at different frequencies is measured. Two seated valves were used, one for increasing and one for decreasing the pressure in the hose. The volume of oil coming out from the hose was measured with a cylinder. Three different hoses are tested. The test results agree rather well with one of the dynamic rubber models and with the black box model, useful for control system analysis.

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)0.019
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.003

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.180 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydraulic and Pneumatic SystemsFrench-language works237,207