MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

INFLUENCE OF THE USE OF CARAPA GUIANENSIS OIL (ANDIROBA OIL) COMPARED WITH COMMERCIAL CUTTING FLUID IN THE TURNING PROCESS OF THE ABNT 1045 STEEL GRADES

2019· article· en· W3196284052 on OpenAlexaff
Tamires Isabela Mesquita Botelho, G. S. FIGUEIREDO, F. M. PRAXEDES, J. V. U. TEIXEIRA, E. B. MONTEIRO

Bibliographic record

VenuePERIÓDICO TCHÊ QUÍMICA · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural and Food Sciences
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCutting fluidMachiningTool wearProcess (computing)ChipMetallurgyMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing technological advances obtained both in the development of new materials and of machine tools increased the demand for the machining processes and in addition, the use of increased cutting fluids. However, it’s necessary to have characteristics that don’t harm the environment and the operator. In machining processes, cutting fluids, when properly chosen and applied, may reflect benefits during the manufacturing process. This work evaluated the performance of a commercial cutting fluid by comparing it with vegetable oil extracted from carapa guianensis in the abnt 1045 steel turning process. The cutting speed (vc), tool feed (f) and depth (ap) and the influence of the use of both of them on the metal was verified with the following variables: chip analysis, surface finish, cutting temperature and tool wear. It was observed that with the use of andiroba oil, better chip was generated for the safety of the operator, higher cutting temperatures in the piece, higher tool wear and better surface finish with a difference of 23% compared to commercial cutting fluid. Thus, the fluid from andiroba based on the conventional application demonstrated a viable alternative in the turning process of abnt 1045 steel, because it’s biodegradable and reduces petroleum-based cutting fluids.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.580
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePERIÓDICO TCHÊ QUÍMICASame topicAgricultural and Food SciencesFrench-language works237,207