MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Algebraic Differential Kinematics of Planar 4R Linkages

2021· article· en· W4205517145 on OpenAlexaff
M. John D. Hayes, Mirja Rotzoll, Atena E. Iraei, Alia Nichol, Quinn Bucciol

Bibliographic record

Venue2021 20th International Conference on Advanced Robotics (ICAR) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinematicsKinematics equationsAngular velocityPlanarAccelerationAlgebraic numberDifferential equationAngular accelerationMathematicsGeometryTopology (electrical circuits)Mathematical analysisPhysicsCombinatoricsComputer scienceRobot kinematicsClassical mechanicsRobotArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper some new and some already established results are discussed which are ideally suited for teaching four-bar mechanism kinematics to senior undergraduate mechanical engineering students. We re-examine the velocity and acceleration level kinematics of planar 4R linkages for the six distinct angle pairings of the four link orientation angles, θi-θj, in the light of the first two time derivatives of the resulting algebraic equations. Freudenstein's Theorem 1, which states that the angular velocity ratio of the two ground-fixed moving links is equivalent to a ratio of the three instantaneous centres of velocity aligned on the line joining the centres of the two ground-fixed R-pairs, is re-expressed in terms of the coupler line equation via the algebraic input-output (IO) equation, and confirmed using the first time derivative of the same equation. We prove that similar ratios can be easily obtained for the five other distinct IO equations for any planar 4R linkage. A clear advantage of our novel approach is that we obtain six signed ratios, thereby indicating the relative sense of the angular velocities, whereas the generalised Freudenstein theorem 1 reveals only four. We next identify conditions for minimum and maximum angular velocities and propose a corollary to Freudenstein's Theorem 2. Finally, we investigate the acceleration level kinematics for all six IO equations, determine extreme values, and discuss implications for extreme values of torque and force transfer as well as shaking forces.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2021 20th International Conference on Advanced Robotics (ICAR)Same topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207