Identification of Friction Parameters for Limited Relative Displacement Contacts
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
Damping using dry friction has long been recognized as an effective control method for many vibration problems. However, given the strong nonlinear nature of friction, the theoretical and experimental investigations of associated non-linear control methods are much more difficult than for linear control methods. Moreover, the difficulty of identifying friction models parameters for Limited Relative Displacement (LRD) contacts is still a subject of research. This study first proposes an identification procedure to evaluate the ability of the LuGre friction model to predict small amplitude (30 μ m–150 μ m) frictionally damped vibrations for a LRD contact. An experimental setup implementing an ideal frictionally damped Single Degree Of Freedom (SDOF) oscillator connected to an electrodynamic shaker is then presented to study friction damping. The simulation results are assessed against the experimental results, demonstrating that the identification procedure is well suited to estimate the parameters of the LuGre friction model and that the model captures very well the friction phenomenon for small amplitude vibrations.
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