MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dynamic Modeling of Hydraulic Shovel Excavators for Geomaterials

2008· article· en· W2039106235 on OpenAlexafffund
Samuel Frimpong, Yafei Hu, Hilary I. Inyang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Geomechanics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic and Pneumatic Systems
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Alberta
KeywordsExcavatorShovelBoomKinematicsExcavationFlexibility (engineering)Computer scienceJoint (building)EngineeringMarine engineeringStructural engineeringGeotechnical engineeringMechanical engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hydraulic shovel excavator has found significant applications in surface mining, construction, and geotechnical operations due to its flexibility and mobility. The key to high availability and utilization of this shovel is adequate understanding of machine dynamics and machine-formation interactions among other technical, operating, safety, and economic factors. These shovels are capital intensive, complex in design and operation within severely constrained environments. Detailed dynamic modeling and analysis are required to understand their effective utilization for achieving efficient operating performance and economic useful lives. Previous attempts at solving these problems are limited because they do not provide knowledge on the resistive forces and moments for efficient excavation. In this paper, the Newton-Euler techniques are used to develop hydraulic shovel dynamic models with numerical examples. Detailed analysis of the results shows that: (1) the kinematics of the stick-bucket joint (joint 3) is the most critical and effective control of this joint and is important input into efficient excavation design and execution; and (2) the highest resistive moments occur between the duration of 1.5 and 2.0s after the start of formation excavation and the highest magnitudes are 1,500Nm (for stick), 900Nm (for bucket), and 600Nm (for boom). Based on these results, the path trajectories, dynamic velocity and acceleration profiles, and dimensioned parameters for optimum feed force, torques, and momentum of shovel boom-bucket assembly can be modeled and used for efficient excavation. The optimum digging forces and resistances for the hydraulic shovel excavator can also be modeled and used to predict optimum excavation performance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations45
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of GeomechanicsSame topicHydraulic and Pneumatic SystemsFrench-language works237,207