MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Parametric Shape Optimization of Stretch Webs in a Progressive Die Process using a Neural Network Surrogate Model

2021· article· en· W3174718247 on OpenAlexaff
Shreeram Athreya, A Weinschenk, Florian Steinlehner, D. Budnick, Michael J. Worswick, Wolfram Volk, Stefan Huhn

Bibliographic record

VenueIOP Conference Series Materials Science and Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooForming Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite element methodArtificial neural networkSurrogate modelParametric statisticsProcess (computing)Computer scienceDie (integrated circuit)BendingAutomationMechanical engineeringArtificial intelligenceStructural engineeringEngineeringMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Progressive die stamping provides a solution for producing sheet metal parts in large quantities. These parts are connected to carriers by stretch webs. As the part undergoes bending and forming operations, the stretch webs are exposed to translational and rotational deformation. A suitable design of these entities is crucial to avoid failure caused by splits or excessive thinning. A common way to evaluate such designs is to use finite element (FEM) simulation. Since it is not efficient to run FEM based optimization studies for the design optimization and to enable further automation of the stretch web design, this paper is proposing the use of machine learning (ML) technologies. A surrogate model based on an artificial neural network is used as a predictor in the presented study. This neural network is used to optimize the geometric parameters of the stretch web to obtain a quality result. The model is trained using FEM results and the study shows that it was possible to obtain an accurate model with a prediction error of 5%. The trained surrogate model can be used for the optimization study. This approach is computationally inexpensive and can provide very good results.

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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.725

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIOP Conference Series Materials Science and EngineeringSame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207