# 2026-02-10 — Technical Lead Daily Log

## Assignment: KB Gen 002 — KBS Session Processing

Received from Manager via OP_09 handoff. Processed 3 KBS capture sessions from Antoine.

### Key Findings

1. **Mass discrepancy resolved:** 974 kg → 11.33 kg. Expression is `p1`, not `p173`. The intake data was wrong — KBS session is ground truth.

2. **Major confirmed parameters:**
   - Beam: 5,000 mm cantilever, I-beam cross-section
   - Load: 10,000 kgf downward at free end
   - Material: AISI Steel 1005, ρ = 7.3 g/cm³
   - Mesh: CQUAD4 thin shell, 33.7 mm elements
   - Holes: 10 count, 300 mm dia, 4,000 mm span, 500 mm offsets

3. **Gap status:** Closed G1, G2, G8. Opened G10-G15. Most critical: G10 (baseline displacement re-verification) and G11 (baseline stress — never measured).

4. **New expression names discovered:** `beam_half_height`, `beam_half_width`, `beam_length`, `p6` (hole span), `p1` (mass)

5. **Antoine's directive:** "Please optimize" — but we need baseline re-verification first.

### Concerns

- The 11.33 kg vs 974 kg mass difference is a factor of ~86×. This fundamentally changes the optimization landscape. The old displacement value (22 mm) is almost certainly from a different model state.
- Baseline displacement and stress must be measured fresh before optimization begins.
- At DV extremes, holes WILL overlap. Need geometric feasibility constraint.
- The `p6` hole span as a potential 5th DV needs a decision.

### Deliverables
- ✅ All KB files updated (7 files, 642 insertions)
- ✅ Git commit: `b88657b` — pushed to Gitea
- ✅ Gen 002 document with full transcript analysis
- ✅ Mass discrepancy analysis and resolution
- ✅ Gap resolution summary