MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404350701 · doi:10.1115/pvp2024-122701

A Novel Optimization Method to Improve Assembly Concentricity of Aero-Engine Rotor With Bolted Flange Joints Using Genetic Algorithms

2024· article· en· W4404350701 on OpenAlexaff
Linbo Zhu, Xiaobo Yu, Abdel‐Hakim Bouzid, Hanwen Zhang, Junbing Liu, Jun Hong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGear and Bearing Dynamics Analysis
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlangeAero engineRotor (electric)Genetic algorithmComputer scienceStructural engineeringEngineeringAlgorithmMechanical engineeringMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The assembly concentricity of the aero-engine rotor is a crucial parameter for assessing the overall assembly quality. It significantly influences vibration characteristics, particularly during high-speed rotation. Aero-engine rotors commonly utilize bolted flange joints as the fundamental method of connection. However, it is very difficult to accurately control the concentricity in practice due to the influences of geometric errors, assembly angles, et al. This paper presents a novel method to optimize the assembly concentricity of multi-stage aero-engine rotors using a genetic algorithm, which considers the amount of concentricity of each rotor. The objective of the optimization is to minimize the concentricity. The assembly angles of the bolted flange joints rotors are considered as the design variables. A prediction model for the concentricity of multi-stage rotors related to the assembly angles is proposed by using the homogeneous coordinate transformation theory. The concentricity of the final assembly is minimized by controlling the assembly angle of each rotor and the best assembly angles of different rotors can be obtained. The developed approach is validated by experimental tests on a multi-stage rotor. This study can provide guidance and enhance the dynamic performance of bolted joints for aero-engine rotors.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.256
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.236 · 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
GenreMethods

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 topicGear and Bearing Dynamics AnalysisFrench-language works237,207