On the Development of Protective Devices for Bending Press
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brake presses are machines which are widely found in the manufacturing industry. They enable metal sheets and plates to be bent in multiple ways so as to shape a wide variety of parts. The very principle by which these machines function creates a pinch and crushing zone for operators notably as far as their hands and fingers are concerned. This paper recounts research projects conducted in the last 30 years at École de Technologie Supérieure (ETS). Historically, the first publication described the state of the situation in the 1990s in terms of safety of brake presses found in the transport equipment and machine manufacturing industry in Quebec. It was found that a small percentage of the brake presses surveyed were properly equipped with adequate safety devices. The research report showed a number of problematic situations arising in industry such as complex shapes (for example, cones, tubes, boxes with multiples bends) which render use of protective devices available at the time difficult and even unfeasible. To address the issue of the low prevalence of protective devices on brake presses, a study on the feasibility and applicability of light curtains on these machines was conducted. It was shown that the mode of operation of the light curtain as well as the geometry of the work-pieces were crucial factors which determined the feasibility of light curtains as effective protective devices on brake presses. Difficulties in using these devices in certain cases were uncovered. To alleviate these difficulties, a further research project sought to develop more flexible protective device on brake press. The concept was based on computer vision. A bracelet was to be worn by the operator. A system of cameras captured images of the operator’s hands and a computer algorithm calculated in real time the position of the hand with respect to a defined hazard zone. From the risk assessment and reduction viewpoint, a risk evaluation methodology based on fuzzy numbers was developed to address the issue of lack of reliability both machine and human-related in assessing probability of occurrence of hazardous events. A risk reduction methodology was also proposed helping to identify action priorities in an analytical way.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".