MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7008995431

Design of an Automated Scrap Sheet Removal System

2022· report· en· W7008995431 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2022
Typereport
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScrapSheet metalLift (data mining)Component (thermodynamics)ExcavatorProcess (computing)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ryerson Canada, is one of the largest metal distributors in North America. The team has partnered with Ryerson to design an Automated Scrap Sheet Removal System to improve the company’s cut-to-length process. The current offload process takes 20 minutes per coil and results in a lost production time of 330 man-hours per year, equating to a total loss of $117,000 USD annually. Through a series of site visits and client meetings, the team was able to develop a list of client needs and specifications to solidify the objective of the design. From the client needs, the team determined two separate processes within the removal operation as a basis to separate the system into two design components. Component 1 was designed to offload the scrap sheet metal from the cut line, whereas Component 2 was designed as a motorized cart system to receive the scrap metal sheets from Component 1 and move it to the crane area. The design of Component 1 incorporates staggered roller wheels to assist in sheet metal sliding, gussets for additional side-loading stability, and compact packaging when folded for the design to fit in the designated space. The hydraulic cylinders specified for this setup have a stroke length of 8” and will actuate the lift to full extension in 5 seconds. At full extension, a variable height stopper moves below the lift table surface and allows the sheet to slide down the lift. Analytical and numerical analysis such as yield, buckling, and fatigue were used to optimize the scissor design of Component, and any other failure modes were investigated through a Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA). The design of Component 2 consisted of reinforcing two existing sheet metal skids for conversion to motorized carts. The upper cart uses two HSS steels placed directly below the existing skid structural tubes, whereas the lower cart incorporates one section of HSS steels centered on the existing skid. These carts roll on a wide flange beam setup for use as a rail system. Both carts incorporate single drive wheels driven by reduction gearboxes and 3-phase electric motors. Power transmission is accomplished by a No. 40 chain drive between the gearbox output shaft and drive wheel on each cart. Analytical and numerical analysis were also used to optimize the design of Component 2, and any other failure modes were investigated through a Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA). The integration of the two design components led to an overall design that meets the client needs by safely withstanding possible modes of failure and decreasing the cycle time by 76%. Between Components 1 and 2, the total cost is approximately $12,000 CAD in materials, which is under the allotted budget of $15,000 CAD.

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)0.000
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→French-language works237,207→