A comparative study of static and dynamic properties of honeycomb non-pneumatic wheels and a pneumatic wheel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three-dimensional finite element (FE) models of the honeycomb NPWs with three different spokes’ configurations, realized by varying the cell angle, were formulated. The validity of the proposed NPW FE models was demonstrated by comparing the predicted wheel responses with the reported data. A FE model of the pneumatic wheel of identical size was also formulated and verified on the basis of the measured vertical force-deflection and cornering properties. The verified NPW models were subsequently employed to study their feasibility through comparisons of in-plane as well as out-of-plane properties with those of the pneumatic wheel. The influences of the cell angle and normal wheel load on the static and dynamic properties of the NPWs were also investigated. The results showed load-dependent longitudinal stiffness of the wheel due to strong coupling between radial and longitudinal deformations of the honeycomb spokes. The lateral stiffness, however, was observed to be load-independent due to negligible coupling between radial and lateral deformations of the spokes. The spokes of the honeycomb NPWs could thus be easily tuned to achieve vertical and longitudinal stiffness comparable to those of the reference pneumatic wheel. The lateral and cornering stiffness of the NPWs with the planar spokes, however, were substantially higher, irrespective of the spokes’ configuration considered. The significantly higher cornering stiffness resulted in rapid saturation of the cornering force of the NPWs at side-slip angles about 1.1°, which is likely to cause lateral sliding of the wheels and potential loss of directional control under higher side slip conditions.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".