MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Development of the LWD-200B Full Hydraulic Open Cut Mine Drill

2013· article· en· W2014857673 on OpenAlexaff
Ji Ping Zhang, Xin Ping Han, Shi Jin, Zhao Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Mechanics and Materials · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeoscience and Mining Technology
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrillingDrillEngineeringHydraulic motorExcavatorHydraulic cylinderCoal miningDrill pipeHydraulic machineryPulleyTrippingMeasurement while drillingMarine engineeringMechanical engineeringCoal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to improve the technical level, perforation efficiency and ability of LWD-200B full hydraulic open cut mine drill to adapt to the complex geological conditions, we developed LWD-200B multi-function full hydraulic open cut mine drill, the drill has rotary cutting, impact and roller bit drill three functions.The drill travel use hydraulic motor to drive crawler belt running gear, low speed high torque hydraulic motor to direct top drive drilling rod. Pressure and lifting system use a long stroke hydraulic cylinder, wire rope and pulley mechanism, load sensing constant power variable pump , load sensing electromagnetic proportional multi-way directional valve. The control system uses electronic control handle and PLC controller, design pressure, speed, length, temperature sensors etc. and GPS base station, with real-time data acquisition, display, lithology automatic identification, closed-loop feedback control, GPS precise positioning , the manual and automatic drilling, specified depth or level drilling function. It applies to drilling diameter 150mm ~ 200mm blast hole in various types of open pit mine.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.186 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Mechanics and MaterialsSame topicGeoscience and Mining TechnologyFrench-language works237,207