MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366249477 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2022-0155

Vibration analysis of a cracked beam using the finite element method

2023· article· en· W4366249477 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Hui Long, Yilun Liu, Kefu Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubharmonic functionBeam (structure)Structural engineeringFinite element methodVibrationStiffness matrixStiffnessBending stiffnessBendingHarmonicNatural frequencyAcousticsEngineeringPhysicsMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is motivated by the condition monitoring and fault diagnostics of structural beams used in large-scale vibrating screens for the mining industry. For the purpose of developing a reliable model-based approach, a new stiffness matrix of a three-dimensional finite element is proposed for modelling a beam with a breathing crack. Using the obtained stiffness matrix, a finite element model was derived for a cracked beam subjected to a bidirectional base excitation. With the model, a computer simulation was conducted to examine the influence of the crack depth on the natural frequencies of the beam. The numerical results show that the crack influences mainly the natural frequencies of the bending modes in the direction of the crack's growth. The simulation also investigates the responses of the beam subjected to a harmonic base excitation in two directions. The numerical results show that the responses of the cracked beam contain several superharmonic components, and the amplitude of superharmonic components increases with the increase in crack depth. Experiments are conducted to validate the proposed dynamic model using both impact testing and forced testing.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207