MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3102515349 · doi:10.3390/ma13225092

Evaluation of Self-Propelled Rotary Tool in the Machining of Hardened Steel Using Finite Element Models

2020· article· en· W3102515349 on OpenAlexaff
Usama Umer, Hossam A. Kishawy, Mustufa Haider Abidi, Syed Hammad Mian, Khaja Moiduddin

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite element methodMachiningChip formationDisplacement (psychology)Mechanical engineeringMaterials scienceHardened steelChipHeat transferTool wearHeat fluxStructural engineeringEngineeringMechanicsMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a model for assessing the performance of self-propelled rotary tool during the processing of hardened steel. A finite element (FE) model has been proposed in this analysis to study the hard turning of AISI 51200 hardened steel using a self-propelled rotary cutting tool. The model is developed by utilizing the explicit coupled temperature displacement analysis in the presence of realistic boundary conditions. This model does not take into account any assumptions regarding the heat partitioning and the tool-workpiece contact area. The model can predict the cutting forces, chip flow, induced stresses, and the generated temperature on the cutting tool and the workpiece. The nodal temperatures and heat flux data from the chip formation analysis are used to achieve steady-state temperatures on the cutting tool in the heat transfer analysis. The model outcomes are compared with reported experimental data and a good agreement has been found.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207