MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006045221 · doi:10.1088/1361-665x/ab74ba

Design optimization and experimental characterization of a rotary magneto-rheological fluid damper to control torsional vibration

2020· article· en· W3006045221 on OpenAlexafffund
Ehab Abouobaia, Ramin Sedaghati, Rama Bhat

Bibliographic record

VenueSmart Materials and Structures · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVibration Control and Rheological Fluids
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMagnetorheological fluidDamperTorqueDamping torqueVibrationSequential quadratic programmingBingham plasticOptimal designInertiaFinite element methodTorsional vibrationEngineeringMagnetic fieldControl theory (sociology)Structural engineeringComputer scienceMaterials sciencePhysicsQuadratic programmingMathematicsAcousticsRheologyClassical mechanicsMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper aims at optimum design formulation of a rotary disk-type magneto-rheological (MR) fluid damper to increase its torsional vibration control performance. The objective is to maximize the torsional damping torque for a given volume, geometric and inertia constraints. The damping torque has been derived based on Bingham plastic model for a commercial MR fluid provided by Lord corporation. As MR fluid’s yield strength directly depends on the applied magnetic field intensity, an analytical magnetic circuit analysis has been conducted to approximately evaluate the magnetic field intensity in the MR fluid gap. A finite element model of the rotary MR damper has also been developed to evaluate the magnetic field distribution. A formal design optimization problem has then been formulated to maximize the dynamic range for a given volume under geometric, inertia and torque ratio constraints. Genetic algorithm combined with sequential quadratic programming method has been utilized to accurately capture the global optimum solution. Finally, a proof-of-concept of the optimal design has been manufactured and then tested experimentally to investigate the generated damping torque under different current excitation and also to validate the model and optimization strategy.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSmart Materials and StructuresSame topicVibration Control and Rheological FluidsFrench-language works237,207