MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309418502 · doi:10.1177/25165984221135047

Multi-criteria optimization of micro-hole on glass using developed <i>µ</i> -abrasive jet machine set-up

2022· article· en· W4309418502 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vinod V. Vanmore, Uday A. Dabade

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Micromanufacturing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicErosion and Abrasive Machining
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNozzleAbrasiveMachiningTaguchi methodsMechanical engineeringMaterials scienceOrthogonal arrayJet (fluid)Engineering drawingComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In non-traditional machining, micro-abrasive jet machining (MAJM) is a cost-effective machining process. MAJM has been used for fabricating electronic devices and microfluidic channels. This work has made an effort to utilize MAJM for glass. A new design and fabrication of the Laval type of nozzle have been proposed to improve machining accuracy. A nozzle is conceived to ensure specific characteristics of the mixture (compressed air and abrasive particles) pass through it. The abrasive particle force is converted to kinetic energy, increasing the mixture’s velocity. The cross-sectional area of the nozzle can be circular, rectangular, square, or oval. A circular cross-sectional nozzle has been developed for high velocity, precise etching, and patterning on difficult-to-machine materials such as steel alloys. A circular cross-sectional micro-nozzle with a large aspect ratio is proposed, and the flow characteristics and cutting performance are examined precisely by the experiment. Efforts are being made to make machining processes sustainable, productive, and efficient. Here, the Taguchi-grey relational analysis integration approach has been used to analyze the machining parameters such as air pressure, stand-off distance, and abrasive mesh size (AMS). The top hole diameter, bottom hole diameter, material removal rate, and radial overcut are the response variables in this investigation. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) results showed that the AMS was the most efficient parameter, which followed the processing condition on the total input of the multi-purpose function. The reported optimized process parameters are air pressure of 8 bar, stand-off distance of 2 mm, and AMS mix (50%+100%) micron, which significantly affects the top and bottom micro-hole diameters.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of MicromanufacturingSame topicErosion and Abrasive MachiningFrench-language works237,207