MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7017380318

Bag Splitting Hopper

2019· report· en· W7017380318 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2019
Typereport
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrainstormingProduct (mathematics)Process (computing)Work (physics)Product designDesign review (U.S. government)Operator (biology)Engineering design process
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nutrien Rocanville Potash (NRP) is a Saskatchewan based producer of potash fertilizer that wished to address safety concerns associated with the reagent addition process. This process currently requires operators to work to underneath a suspended 1000 [kg] load without a safeguard, putting them in a serious injury or fatality risk. The objective of this project was to develop a design by December 4ththat reduces the time the operator spends in the “line-of-fire” from ?? to 0 seconds, increases the height adjustability of the current support structure from 7 to 18 inches, provides the operators the ability to stop product flow for maintenance, and maintains the required ultimate factor of safety(FOS) of 5.Customer needs were used to identify components of the design that would be required to achieve the target specifications which included: a structural safeguard, bag opening method, bag closing method and a height adjust feature. Team brainstorming sessions produced a number of potential design solutions for each design component. A rigorous multistep screening and evaluating process was then applied until a final design concepts remained. The Bag Splitting Hopper was chosen as the concept the team would move forward with as it best met the customer’s needs. A Failure Mode and Effects Analysis was conducted by the team to strengthen weak areas of the design which added additional components to the overall design. A 3D model of the design was created to meet the initial and newly discovered requirements. Analytical analysis of the material strength and ergonomics of the structure was then conducted, followed by numerical analysis to corroborate the analytical results and explore areas for optimization. After the design was complete, material and fabrication quotes were collected and came within budget. The team then compiled all information needed by the customer into this report for them to make an informed decision moving forward. The team achieved the project objectives by developing a design that: completely removed the operator from the line of fire, increased the bag height adjustability to 1?” and added15”ofadditionaladjustability for the entire structure, utilized a slide gate and chute for complete flow control, with all...

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.008

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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