MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024305978 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2019-0170

3D-printed torsional mechanism demonstrating fundamentals of free vibrations

2020· article· en· W3024305978 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ayşe Tekeş

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExperimental Learning in Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKennesaw State University
KeywordsMechanism (biology)Data acquisitionPhysicsMechanical engineeringVibrationPotentiometerBearing (navigation)Computer scienceAcousticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Commercially available turn-key systems are expensive and require substantial lab space, making it harder to accommodate many in vibrations laboratories. This study presents a low-cost, compact, and portable torsional mechanism incorporating multiple rotating disks and a long thin rod supported vertically with bearings and fixed supports at the top and bottom ends to study the modeling of systems using experimental data. The mechanism consisting of a rod, disks, bearing, and disk supports, and the base is built by 3D printing using thermoplastic PETG. The long, thin rod in this mechanism serves as a torsional spring. The equivalent stiffnesses of the 2 DOF system can be changed by adjusting the vertical position of the disks with respect to the ends, thereby shortening or lengthening the effective twist length of the thin rod. The overall dimensions of the mechanism are 6 inches in height, 5 inches in width, and 2 inches in depth, and the expected cost including the experimental setup is around USD$30 if an Arduino is used for data acquisition and $170 if equipped with a National Instruments external data acquisition card. Learning objectives of the lab course utilizing the proposed mechanism are identified. The free response data are collected for a single degree-of-freedom system using an external data acquisition card and potentiometer and unknown parameters of the system are determined by system identification. Mechanism unknown parameters are calculated using system identification and a theoretical model is compared with the experimental data.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0060.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicExperimental Learning in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207