MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7135223116 · doi:10.66320/epvkrp64

Topology Optimization, CAD Modelling, and FEA: Advancements with Ansys, Abaqus, and Hyper work

2024· article· W7135223116 on OpenAlexaff
Danish Hassan

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Corridor Journal of Engineering Science · 2024
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicTopology Optimization in Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCADSuiteTopology optimizationComputer Aided DesignSoftwareRapid prototypingNew product developmentVirtual prototypingProduct (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Topology optimization, CAD modeling, and Finite Element Analysis (FEA) have become integral parts of modern engineering design and manufacturing, enabling innovative solutions to complex structural problems. Advancements in these areas, especially with software tools like Ansys, Abaqus, and HyperWorks, have revolutionized the way engineers approach product design. Topology optimization allows for the efficient distribution of material within a given design space, ensuring the best structural performance with minimal weight and material usage. In combination with CAD modeling, which provides detailed geometric representations, and FEA, which simulates real-world conditions to predict the behavior of materials under stress, these tools enable the creation of optimized, high-performance structures. Ansys and Abaqus offer advanced solvers for linear and nonlinear analyses, while HyperWorks excels in multi-disciplinary optimization, providing a comprehensive suite for various engineering applications. The integration of these tools has made it possible to tackle increasingly sophisticated challenges in automotive, aerospace, and civil engineering industries. These advancements not only improve product performance but also significantly reduce time and cost in the design and prototyping phases. The continuous development of algorithms and simulation methods further enhances the capabilities of topology optimization and FEA, offering engineers the ability to explore and validate innovative designs with higher precision and reliability.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 venueResearch Corridor Journal of Engineering ScienceSame topicTopology Optimization in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207