MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964875302 · doi:10.1017/dsi.2019.140

A Lifecycle Cost-Driven System Dynamics Approach for Considering Additive Re-Manufacturing or Repair in Aero-Engine Component Design

2019· article· en· W2964875302 on OpenAlexafffund
Lydia Lawand, Khalil Al Handawi, Massimo Panarotto, Petter Andersson, Ola Isaksson, Michael Kokkolaras

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ... International Conference on Engineering Design · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean Commission
KeywordsComponent (thermodynamics)System lifecycleComputer scienceProduct lifecycleService (business)Systems engineeringReliability engineeringManufacturing engineeringEngineeringApplication lifecycle managementNew product developmentBusinessSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aero-engine component design decisions should consider re-manufacturing and/or repair strategies and their impact on lifecycle cost. Existing design approaches do not account for alternative production technologies such as the use of additive manufacturing in life extension processes. This paper presents a modeling and optimization methodology for examining the impact of design decisions in the early development stage on component lifecycle cost during the in-service phase while considering the potential use of additive manufacturing in life extension strategies. Specifically, a system dynamics model is developed to assess different end-of-life scenarios. Finally, an optimization problem is formulated and solved to minimize lifecycle cost with respect to design variables related to re-manufacturing.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.187 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ... International Conference on Engineering DesignSame topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207