MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021808080 · doi:10.4271/2011-28-0129

Simulation and Test Correlation of Wheel Impact Test

2011· article· en· W2021808080 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed Billal K, S Vinothkumar, Sabarinathan Srinivasan, Anilkumar S Nesarikar

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Engineering and Vibrations Research
Canadian institutionsChrysler (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest (biology)CorrelationComputer scienceMathematicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The wheel impact test evaluates wheel structural performance for a typical lateral curb impact event occurring in passenger cars and light trucks. This test which is as per SAE J -175 standard has a striker dropped from a specified height on to a fixture mounted wheel-tire assembly. This impact test performance is critical to meeting overall structural performance for the wheel. There are many processes and methods available to simulate impact tests using FE analysis and in this study, certain existing methods are fine tuned to facilitate improved correlation with aforementioned lab test. Abaqus explicit is used in the simulation process and FE analysis-test correlation is achieved within 3% (strain gauge measurements). The improved method closely captures the behavior of the wheel during and after impact including capturing the variation of bolt pretension during the impact test. The wheel width before and after impact is another parameter used to compare analysis and test results. Further, the contribution of impact load between the wheel and tire is studied, to support the modeling strategy used in this new method.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicMechanical Engineering and Vibrations ResearchFrench-language works237,207