MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045196812 · doi:10.3390/act9030058

A Critical Analysis of Flow-Compensated Hydrostatic Single Rod Actuators: Simulation Study

2020· article· en· W3045196812 on OpenAlexafffund
Gustavo Koury Costa, Nariman Sepehri

Bibliographic record

VenueActuators · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic and Pneumatic Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsActuatorHydraulic cylinderElectronic circuitCylinderHydrostatic equilibriumHydraulic circuitControl theory (sociology)Flow (mathematics)EngineeringMechanical engineeringComputer scienceMechanicsControl engineeringElectrical engineeringPhysicsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is well established that the differential cylinder area in pump-controlled single-rod actuators creates the need of correctly switching the connections between the main circuit lines and a charge circuit, in order to provide means for equalising the flows into and out of the pump and the actuator. Many attempts to automatically switch the charge circuit connections to either cap- and rod-sides of the hydraulic cylinder have been made through the years. However, in many of these attempts, strong oscillations in the cylinder motion were observed when operational quadrants were changed under some particular velocity and force conditions. In this paper, we perform a thorough numerical analysis for some representative pump-controlled single-rod actuators. The goal is to understand the causes of undesirable behaviour of several circuits under certain operating situations. We show through comprehensive simulations that all but one circuit design produces undesirable oscillatory results under these circumstances. This paper is built upon and complements a previously published paper by the same authors on this important subject.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActuatorsSame topicHydraulic and Pneumatic SystemsFrench-language works237,207