MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2463162702

KINETOSTATIC ANALYSIS OF A BEAM-AXLE SUSPENSION WITH PANHARD ROD RESTRAINING LINKAGE

2014· article· en· W2463162702 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Vehicle Design · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Engineering and Vibrations Research
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinematicsSuspension (topology)AxleEngineeringStiffnessStructural engineeringLinkage (software)Control theory (sociology)Beam (structure)Equations of motionMechanicsMathematicsPhysicsClassical mechanicsComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kinetostatic response characteristics of a beam–axle suspension comprising a transversal Panhard rod constraint are evaluated as a function of the suspension geometry, vertical load and lateral force arising from a steady turning manoeuvre. A roll plane model of a road vehicle is developed incorporating the kinematic constraint posed by the transverse linkage. The non–linear algebraic equations governing the roll plane kinematic motion are formulated and solved using the Newton iterative techniques. The kinetostatic response characteristics are evaluated in terms of the body roll, effective roll stiffness and variations in the coordinates of the roll centre for various geometric parameters. The coordinates of the suspension roll centre and sprung mass cg are determined from the algebraic equations developed by vector loop method. The results of the study show that the suspension spring rate and the location and orientation of the Panhard rod influence the kinetostatic roll properties of the suspension in a significant manner, when the vehicle is subiect to vertical and lateral forces.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.661
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.242 · 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