Vibration Characteristics of Rock Under Harmonic Impact
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modal analysis of rock is done in this study, and the results of numerical analysis are presented. Meanwhile, the amplitude-frequency characteristic curve of rock in steady state response is investigated based on the principle of vibration. In addition, indoor experiments are carried out to further analyze the vibration characteristics of rock under harmonic impact. Three main control parameters are considered, including drilling way, excitation frequency and impacting amplitude. Our investigations confirm that the rock has different resonant frequencies and vibration modes in different orders for free vibration system, and there is only one resonant frequency for a rock with one degree of freedom. Based on theoretical analysis and indoor experiments, it can be concluded that the vibration amplitude under resonant frequency of rock is significantly higher than that under non-resonant frequency and in conventional drilling. Also, the vibration response of rock is in the harmonic form by the harmonic impact, and increases with the increase of the impacting amplitude. The vibration characteristics of rock by harmonic impact are validated by numerical analysis and experimental results. Harmonic vibration impact drilling can greatly enhance the vibration amplitude of rock, and further improve the rate of penetration.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".