MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Elastodynamic analysis of rotating solids by novel nodal position finite element method

2024· article· en· W4403909133 on OpenAlexafffund
Qi Zhang, Zheng Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Mechanics - A/Solids · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Structure Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNODALFinite element methodPosition (finance)PhysicsStructural engineeringMathematical analysisGeometryMechanicsMathematicsEngineeringAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study develops a novel 8-node isoparametric hexahedral element using the Nodal Position Finite Element Method (NPFEM) for elastodynamic analysis of rotating solids. The element also incorporates the flexural modes directly into its element shape function to alleviate the shear locking when modeling the bending deformation of solids. Unlike conventional displacement-based finite element methods, which require the decoupling of elastic deformation from rigid-body motions, the NPFEM eliminates this process by directly representing strain and kinetic energies through nodal position coordinates, which avoids potential approximation errors in the decoupling process. To validate the accuracy and efficacy of this new NPFEM solid element, numerical simulations of a beam under static and dynamic loads are conducted and benchmarked against the theoretical solutions. Then, dynamic analysis of a rotating blade demonstrates that the NPFEM element can directly account for the centrifugal stiffening effect and superharmonic resonance of rotating blades without resorting to conventional methods. The successful implementation of this NPFEM element in complex simulations highlights its potential to provide significant advancements in computational mechanics.

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 score0.006

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.238
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Mechanics - A/SolidsSame topicComposite Structure Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207