The impact of broken rock angle of repose on truck and shovel capacity and tire life
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This article outlines a closed-form solution to calculate truck body volumetric capacity. This solution also provides a means of evaluating broken rock density and swell factor, which may be further extended to determine shovel dipper and excavator bucket fill factor. The key to the analysis is an evaluation of the broken rock angle of repose. The analysis procedure defined in this article alleviates the need for using assumed values in operational planning. Further, the volumetric capacity and broken rock angle of repose and density may then be used to evaluate the load distribution within a truck body. This is critical to understanding the impact on tire loading and performance, which may be evaluated and compared to the tire manufacturer recommended tonne -kilometer-per-hour limit. The results of the analysis proposed here indicate that for the truck body designs investigated, the SAE International body design standard angle of repose assumption of 26.6° (2:1 slope) is much lower than most materials hauled (> 33°). Also, the broken rock density assumption in the same SAE International body design standard at 2.0 t/m3 is often too high, and does not permit the target load distribution of 1/3:2/3 front:rear axle to be achieved, effectively placing greater load on the front tires than the rear tires, adversely affecting front tire 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.
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 it