MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969719766 · doi:10.1177/0954406214545818

Modeling, analysis, and co-simulation of cable parallel manipulators for multiple cranes

2014· article· en· W1969719766 on OpenAlexaff
Bin Zi, Long Zhang, Dan Zhang, Sen Qian

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkspaceKinematicsBond graphComputer scienceTorqueHydraulic machineryControl engineeringControl theory (sociology)SimulationEngineeringMechanical engineeringControl (management)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsRobot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the increase of the weight and volume of building components, the collaborative working of multiple cranes is necessary when one crane cannot meet the lifting requirement sometimes. This paper is devoted to model and analyze a type of cable parallel manipulators for multiple cranes (CPMMCs). The CPMMCs have better lifting capability than a single crane and can be applied in complex lifting tasks. Kinematics and dynamics of the end-effector of the CPMMCs are studied and the reachable workspace is carried out additionally. Considering the requirements of large output torque, large motion scope etc. the hydraulic drive mode is adopted. The bond graph method is applied for the analysis of hydraulic systems. Subsequently, the AMESim models for the hydraulic systems are constructed. The performance of the CPMMCs and the accuracy of the models are verified by co-simulation under working conditions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.696
Threshold uncertainty score0.755

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C Journal of Mechanical Engineering ScienceSame topicDynamics and Control of Mechanical SystemsFrench-language works237,207