MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399922027 · doi:10.18280/mmep.110606

Deflection Prediction of an Anti-vibration Mount by Finite Element Analysis

2024· article· en· W4399922027 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Baban K. Suryatal, Prashant K. Ambadekar, Jagannath S. Gawande, K. A. Mahajan, Vijaykumar Javanjal, Mahesh M. Sonekar, R. N. Yerrawar, S. H. Gawande

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMountFinite element methodDeflection (physics)Structural engineeringVibrationEngineeringPhysicsMechanical engineeringAcousticsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To ensure the safety and dependability of rubber components, deflection analysis and prediction play a crucial role in process of design.Material property testing and finite element analysis (FEA) are combined to forecast the maximum deflection of a railway elastomeric pad.IRMRA (Indian Rubber Manufacturer's Research Association) developed the chloroprene rubber.Using the FEA method, maximum deflections of an anti-vibration mount under several compressive loads are calculated.Mooney-Rivlin nonlinear hyperelastic three parameter model with element type Plane 182 is used for and FEA.Curve fitting of the uniaxial tensile test results is used to extract three parameter Mooney-Rivlin model constants by using FEA.Then, these Mooney-Rivlin model constants are used to analyze anti-vibration mount and predict the deflections at different compressive loads.The outcomes are contrasted with the technical specifications provided by the Research Designs and Standards Organization of Indian Railway and predicted deflections are within the limits of maximum values allowed.The results are also contrasted with data from literature, and 10% variation is observed between results obtained and literature results.This methodology can be used to predict deflections of any newly developed rubber at initial stage of design.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.659
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.225 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Modelling and Engineering ProblemsSame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207