Investigating frictional contact behavior for soft material robot simulations
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 The ability to interact safely with the environment is known as one of the major advantages of soft robots (SRs). Due to their low material stiffness, these continuously deformable robots offer inherent flexibility. These advantages make them suitable for application that involve human-robot collaboration in industrial settings as well as medical application such as minimally invasive surgery. To date only few research groups have analyzed the contact and frictional behavior of soft robots. In fact, the contact behavior is often oversimplified or neglected. Motivated by the idea to bridge this gap, this work presents measurements and the resulting coefficient of friction (COF) for silicone rubbers that are widely used in the field of SRs and different contact partners which depend on contact pressure and ambient temperature. From these measurements, a more representative contact model is established and used to more accurately simulate soft material robots’ frictional contact behavior. Moreover the influence of friction and therefore the need to implement frictional behavior is demonstrated for a typical application of a SR.
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