Characterization of Si and SiO2 in Dust Emitted during Granite Polishing as a Function of Cutting Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Particles emitted during manufacturing processes such as polishing can represent a serious danger for the environment and for occupational safety. The formation mechanisms responsible for these dust emissions include chip formation, friction at the tool/workpiece and chip/tool interfaces, shearing and cutting. These mechanisms thus depend on workpiece and tool properties, as well as the polishing conditions. In the case of granite polishing, particle emissions during polishing can contain chemical compounds such as silica, which represent harmful health risks for the worker. It is therefore important to characterize the particles emitted and to search for possible interactions between the particles (size and composition) and the machining conditions in order to find ways of reducing emissions at the source. In this study, an investigation was undertaken to characterize the particles emitted during granite polishing as a function of polishing conditions, type of granite, and abrasive grit sizes used. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was employed for particle morphology characterization and particle grain size and chemical composition were evaluated using X-ray diffraction (XRD) and energy dispersive X-ray (EDX) techniques, respectively. Results show that the influence of polishing speed and feed rate on particle emission depends mainly on the granite type used, providing useful information for controlling the polishing procedure, and thereby dust emission.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".