MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403636404 · doi:10.1115/1.4066976

A New Cutting Mechanics Model for Improved Shear Angle Prediction in Orthogonal Cutting Process

2024· article· en· W4403636404 on OpenAlexafffund
Farshad Kazemi, Chunlei Song, Adam T. Clare, Xiaoliang Jin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsShear (geology)Process (computing)Computer scienceMaterials scienceMechanicsMechanical engineeringGeologyEngineeringPhysicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In metal cutting processes, accurately determining the shear angle is essential, as it governs chip formation and cutting force generation. Despite extensive research conducted on this topic, the accurate prediction of the shear angle remains a subject of ongoing investigation. This paper presents a new analytical model for predicting the shear angle, taking into account the direction difference between the shear stress at the boundary of the primary shear zone and the maximum shear stress. The constitutive property of the workpiece material with respect to the strain, strain rate, and temperature is considered in predicting the shear angle. The results show that the solution for the shear angle is not unique for a given rake and friction angle, and is highly dependent on the flow stress response of the workpiece material. Orthogonal cutting experiments were conducted on steel and aluminum alloys under various uncut chip thicknesses, cutting speeds, and tool rake angles to characterize the chip thickness and shear angle. Based on a comparison between model predictions, experimental results, and data from the literature for various workpiece materials and cutting conditions, it is shown that the proposed model results in an improved prediction for shear angle by considering the stress transformation within the primary shear zone.

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 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 score0.786
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.232
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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Manufacturing Science and EngineeringSame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207