Product Development: Using a 3D Computer Model to Optimize the Stability of the Rocket™ Powered Wheelchair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A three-dimensional (3D) lumped-parameter model of a powered wheelchair was created to aid the development of the Rocket prototype wheelchair and to help explore the effect of innovative design features on its stability. The model was developed using simulation software, specifically Working Model 3D. The accuracy of the model was determined by comparing both its static stability angles and dynamic behavior as it passed down a 4.8-cm (1.9") road curb at a heading of 45 degrees with the performance of the actual wheelchair. The model's predictions of the static stability angles in the forward, rearward, and lateral directions were within 9.3, 7.1, and 3.8% of the measured values, respectively. The average absolute error in the predicted position of the wheelchair as it moved down the curb was 2.2 cm/m (0.9" per 3'3") traveled. The accuracy was limited by the inability to model soft bodies, the inherent difficulties in modeling a statically indeterminate system, and the computing time. Nevertheless, it was found to be useful in investigating the effect of eight design alterations on the lateral stability of the wheelchair. Stability was quantified by determining the static lateral stability angles and the maximum height of a road curb over which the wheelchair could successfully drive on a diagonal heading. The model predicted that the stability was more dependent on the configuration of the suspension system than on the dimensions and weight distribution of the wheelchair. Furthermore, for the situations and design alterations studied, predicted improvements in static stability were not correlated with improvements in dynamic stability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".