Wheel Chock Key Design Elements and Geometrical Profile for Truck Vehicle Restraint
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wheel chocks are rather simple compliant mechanisms for stabilizing vehicles at rest. However, chocks must be carefully designed given the complex interaction between the chock and the tire/suspension system. Despite their importance for safety, literature is surprisingly limited in terms of what makes a wheel chock efficient. Using simple but reliable quasi-static mechanical models, this study identifies mechanical requirements that help to avoid a number of failure modes associated with many existing wheel chocks. Given that chock grounding is not always possible, a chock’s maximum restraining capacity is only obtained when the wheel is completely supported by the chock. A generic chock profile is proposed to achieve this objective while mitigating undesirable failure modes. The profile is based on fundamental mechanical principles and no assumption is made on the load interaction between the chock and the wheel. A more specific clothoid chock profile is further proposed to minimize the tire dynamic contact force with the chock and its rate of variation when engaging a chock in a dynamic situation. The proposed chock design should be tested in the future to confirm its 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".