MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385900979 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3211157/v1

Modeling and optimization of height-related geometrical parameters for thin wall structures manufactured by metal additive manufacturing

2023· preprint· en· W4385900979 on OpenAlexafffund
Mostafa Rahmani Dehaghani, Yifan Tang, Suraj Panicker, Di Wu, Éric Coatanéa, G. Gary Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersEurostarsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBusiness Finland
KeywordsMonotonic functionSet (abstract data type)MathematicsComputer scienceMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cold metal transfer wire arc additive manufacturing (CMT-WAAM) has attracted attention in recent years due to its ability to print walls with higher dimensional accuracy than regular WAAM. To print near net shape parts by CMT-WAAM, there is a need to define a set of height-related geometrical parameters (HGPs) that can capture, quantify, and compare the quality of the height of the produced parts. In the presenting study a set of HGPs, namely, the average height error (AHE), maximum height variation (MHV), and average absolute slope (AAS) are defined and assessed. Fifteen single-track multi-layer walls are printed to check the effect of process parameters on the defined HGPs. It is found that the stability and quality of the print cannot be guaranteed by checking the visual appearance of the single beads and at least five-to-ten-layer walls should be printed. It is also found that the travel speed (TS) and wire feed speed (WFS) have positive monotonic relationships with AAS and MHV, respectively. Correlations between process parameters and HGPs are modeled and optimized using multi-objective optimization and a validation test is performed to check the validity of the developed models. Moreover, HGPs of walls printed using unidirectional and bidirectional path strategies are calculated and compared. Defined HGPs are able to quantify, capture, and compare the quality of height of a wall with only three parameters. The HGPs can be used in further studies to report and compare the quality of height of thin wall structures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.244
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207