MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989893247 · doi:10.1115/1.4045556

Design for Interface Stiffness of Mechanical Products Using Integrated Simulation and Optimization Under Uncertainty

2019· article· en· W2989893247 on OpenAlex
J. Zhang, Min Wu, Qingjin Peng, Uday Shanker Dixit, Peihua Gu

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems Part B Mechanical Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGear and Bearing Dynamics Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStiffnessInterface (matter)FlangeComputer scienceProcess (computing)Finite element methodControl theory (sociology)Structural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Interface stiffness is an important factor influencing the performance of mechanical products. Uncertain factors affect the interface stiffness and stability in the process of product design, manufacture, and operation. How to reduce the impact of uncertain factors on the interface stiffness is a vital problem in interface design. In this paper, a robust optimal design method is proposed for mechanical interfaces considering uncertain factors, which combines the finite element simulation, experiment, and optimization to reduce the sensitivity of interface stiffness to uncertain factors. The proposed interface design method provides an effective way to improve the interface stiffness under uncertain conditions. In order to validate the proposed method, the bolted connection structure of a flange is applied as an example. The interface stiffness of the flange is selected as an optimization target, and the Gaussian process regression is used to construct a two-layer optimal model of the objective function for the design and uncertain parameters. When experimental and optimization results differ significantly, the Kalman filter is used to provide the feedback for the optimization results until the results meet requirements. The final results show that the optimized mechanical interface stiffness is increased by 15.5%, and the error between the optimized prediction and experimental results is within 1% after three times experimental validation and feedback adjustment.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.616
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.220 · 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