Structural Design and Implementation of Omni-Directional Robot Based on Swerve Drive
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Robots are devices that are programmed to perform complex and timing constrained tasks efficiently. They are widely classified as fixed and mobile robots based on their mobility. Although 2-wheel drive robot are easy to build and program, they are restricted to a set of applications due to their limited mobility. This issue is solved by implementing the concept of holonomic robots. Holonomic robots or Omni-Directional robots possess higher degree of freedom, thereby improving the mobility of the bot. Traditional, Omni-Directional robots are developed by employing different types of wheels such as mecanum wheels or spherical wheels. These wheels improve mobility, albeit they impose new challenges. A few challenges include restricted movement on uneven terrain and low availability. These setbacks are overcome in the design and development of one such omnidirectional robot that is being proposed in this paper. The proposed design is an omni directional robot that is built using normal rubber wheels. These wheels are capable of moving side-ways along with their conventional to and fro movement, thereby achieving omnidirectional movement. The paper focuses on the Programming and controlling aspect of the omni directional robot in addition to the underlying CAD design of the bot. This paper concludes with a comparative study of an omni-directional bot and a 2- wheel drive bot. The bot described is generic in other words, it uses a modular approach and can be extended to a wide range of applications. To name a few, surveillance robots, forklifts in warehouses, construction robots, cleaning robots, etc. Furthermore, this design can be extended to automobiles to attain improved mobility and performance. This design has an edge over other designs as it offers greater mobility, and hence it can find its application where the response time must be minimal.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".