MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6981003145

Design of Grain Cart Mainframe Welding Jig

2021· report· en· W6981003145 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2021
Typereport
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicOral History, Memory, Narrative Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)WeldingSection (typography)Project teamCartProject managementEngineering design process
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Elmer’s Manufacturing is a rapidly growing company, located just north of Altona, MB, that specializes in the production of agricultural equipment such as grain carts, harrows, ditch cutters, and bale processors. Elmer’s is looking to increase their manufacturing capacity to produce products that are in high demand. The management team at Elmer’s is in the process of physically expanding their facilities while improving the efficiency of their manufacturing processes. Team 18, a group of four mechanical engineering students from the University of Manitoba, has been selected to assist the team at Elmer’s Manufacturing with one of their improvement projects. The project is meant to decrease the assembly time required to tack weld grain cart mainframes together by utilizing a jig system that is user-friendly and effective. The goal of this project is to decrease the six-hour assembly time of a mainframe by 30%. This final design report covers the overall process leading to the final design and outlines content written in the problem definition report and concept definition report. The introduction provides background to the project and an overview of the project definition report, which was used in phase one of the project. The external research section outlines topics that the student design team researched in preparation for the concept development for this project. Concept generation, completed by the team, with assistance from industrial and academic advisors, resulted in a total of 21 conceptual solutions to the project. Through the process of screening and analyzing concepts based on criteria deemed to be important to the success of the project, the team was able to narrow the desirable solutions down to three concepts. The three concepts were further iterated and optimized until only one design was chosen. After much time in discussion amongst the team and with an engineer from Elmer’s Manufacturing, the final design chosen was the upside-down assembly variation. Fixtures and jigs were later made for this design to ensure that all parts were located and clamped efficiently. This design is modular to be able to work with all four grain cart mainframe assemblies. Concerning the final design, CAD models, a bill of materials, drawings, DXF files, a standard operating procedure, and a cost analysis are delivered within this report to be presented to Elmer’s Manufacturing. In order to prove that this design decreases the six-hour assembly time of a mainframe by 30%, testing and further study will need to be done by workers at Elmer’s Manufacturing.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Same topicOral History, Memory, Narrative Analysis→French-language works237,207→