MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3162615723

Automated Transfer of Plasma Cutting Dust

2016· article· en· W3162615723 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrew Ruday, Jonathan de Vos, Keegan Schkawritka, Kewei Qian

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHigh-Temperature Coating Behaviors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlasmaEnvironmental sciencePhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Russel Metals (The Client), a bulk metal sales and metal processing company, has commissioned a team of four students from the University of Manitoba Mechanical Engineering program to help find a solution for a problem they are experiencing. At its Clarence Avenue location in Winnipeg Russel Metals uses a Kinetic K5000xmc plasma cutter and combination drilling machine for metal processing. Plasma cutting creates debris, dust and fumes. These by-products are removed and contained from the cutting location by the dust collection system, however this system is not capable of containing all the plasma dust created from cutting, as a result this dust is contaminating the shop area around the machine as well exposing machine operators to this dust. The goal of this project is to contain all dust created by cutting operations in a sustainable way and to improve the disposal process. The student team identified and confirmed the clients’ needs regarding the solution to this project as follows, in order of importance; that Plasma cutter downtime be kept to a minimum, that plasma dust be contained during operation of the machine, worker safety is increased, footprint of the machine is not increased, Shop cleanliness is maintained during daily operations, and the solution has long tem sustainability. The project team identified three problem areas that are believed to cause the problem namely the top exhaust vent of the collection unit, the seal between the disposal bin and the collection unit and the disposal process. The team found a solution for all three areas, the implementation of the solution will be done in two phases with a third optional phase. Phase one involves sealing the disposal bin to the collection unit with butyl rubber and adding actuators that will create four points of contact as opposed to the existing one point of contact, as well as extending the top exhaust vent through the exterior wall. Phase two of the solution replaces the existing disposal bin with a custom made hopper to which a screw conveyor is attached, the screw conveyor is attached to a support structure just outside of the facility...

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicHigh-Temperature Coating BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207