MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3115868475 · doi:10.18280/rcma.305-607

Prediction of Temperature During Machinability of Al2O3 Reinforced Al7075

2020· article· en· W3115868475 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
V.Gopala Krishna, Vijay Kumar Shankar, Lakshmidevamma Madarakallu Muniyappa, M.M. Benal

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue des composites et des matériaux avancés · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceMachiningMachinabilityComposite materialMaximum temperatureMetallurgyThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metal matrix composite Al2O3 particle reinforced Al have become useful engineering materials due to their properties such as low cost, wear-resistant, heat-resistant and low weight. The present study focused on prediction of temperature produced during machining of Al2O3 reinforced with Al7075. In this investigation the percentage of Al2O3 (mesh size of 100-300)was varied 1%, 3%, 5%, 7% and 9% to the base material of Al7075. The temperature was measured using thermal gun at machining tip of the tool at which maximum temperature were measured by varying operational parameters such as depth of cut (0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1 and 1.25mm), spindle speed (80, 112, 140, 200 and 355rpm) and feed rate (0.10, 0.12, 0.16, 0.2 and 0.25mm/sec). Experimental results revels that the temperature increases with increase in feed rate and depth, whereas, in case of spindle speed there is a fluctuation in temperature for all the combinations considered. The percentage contribution of operational parameters on temperature was determined using ANOVA analysis. Overall analyses for all the combination considered shows that feed rate (45.07%), depth (33.75%) and spindle speed (5.2%) on temperature. The developed models with a P-value are less than 0.05 were considered to be a statistically significant with 95% of confidence interval. A good agreement between experimental and statistical modeling were achieved and comparison of experimental and statistical analysis were drawn.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.196
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue des composites et des matériaux avancésSame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207