MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Evaluation of a Fabric Channel Cooling Apparatus for Twisted Coiled Actuators

2022· article· en· W4308091055 on OpenAlexafffund
Alex Lizotte, Ana Luisa Trejos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsSoftware portabilityActuatorMechanical engineeringWearable computerThread (computing)Computer scienceConstant (computer programming)Water coolingSimulationEngineeringElectrical engineeringEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wearable robotic systems have the potential to help many individuals with rehabilitation and to support activities of daily living. Unfortunately, these systems are not widespread due to their cost, limited portability, and size. Twisted Coiled Actuators (TCA), novel artificial muscles made from nylon thread, are inexpensive, lightweight, and slim. However, the natural cooling time of these thermally activated muscles is too slow to support rehabilitation or voluntary motions. This paper presents and assesses the feasibility of a novel cooling apparatus for the TCA. The cooling method involves a flexible fabric channel and a miniature air pump to cool the TCA with forced convection. The channel is lightweight, flexible, and can easily be sewn onto other materials to allow easy fabrication of wearable devices. ANSYS Fluent simulations were performed to determine the relationship between the input air velocity and the cooling time constant of the system. The results indicate that the miniature air pumps currently available are not powerful enough to cool the TCA at the required frequencies. There was a 13.2% difference between the cooling time constant predicted by the model and the time constant found experimentally for an input of 1 m/s.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials→French-language works237,207→