MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006675622 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2018-0186

Contact simulation analysis of double cylindrical asperities using the finite element method

2019· article· en· W3006675622 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lihua Wang, Liheng Chen, Yayu Huang, Tingqiang Yao, Chunfeng Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSouthwest Jiaotong UniversityState Key Laboratory of Mechanical TransmissionsChongqing UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAsperity (geotechnical engineering)Materials scienceContact areaFinite element methodContact mechanicsDisplacement (psychology)GrindingMechanicsStress (linguistics)Composite materialStructural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To analyze the microcontact characteristics of the rough joint surface obtained by grinding more accurately, a frictionless contact model of double cylindrical asperities was established. The contact characteristics of double cylindrical asperities with different peak distance and different heights were analyzed using the finite element method. The relationship between contact load, contact pressure, contact area, and contact displacement were studied. And the effect of double asperities on the stress state of the cylindrical asperity contact zone was revealed. The results show that, in the elastic contact stage, the contact load, contact stress, contact pressure, and contact area decreased with an increase in the peak distance, and the corresponding values are smaller than that of single peak asperity contact. In the elastoplastic stage, because of the interaction of the double asperities, the change of the contact pressure with the contact displacement on the double asperities contact is larger than the corresponding value of the single peak asperity under the same conditions. The research can be applied into the model of anisotropic interface and provide theoretical foundations for the study on contact characteristics of grinding interface.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score0.868

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.242 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface InteractionsFrench-language works237,207