Design and implementation of a novel apparatus for terramechanics studies of helical scrolls
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
Modeling the force interaction between a wheel and the ground is necessary when evaluating the effectiveness of a vehicle’s mobility on challenging terrain. Soft soils with low bearing strength are a particularly difficult medium for wheeled vehicles. Helical scrolls have shown promise as an alternative to wheels which can work across a range of terrains, warranting a detailed terramechanics study to model their capabilities. Most of the existing terramechanics literature is limited to wheels and often employs an apparatus to study single wheels in a fixed geometry. This paper describes the design and implementation of a novel apparatus capable of housing a range of scroll geometries and configurations. The apparatus is comprised of a soil container, carriage to drive the scroll in two operating configurations, and a surrounding frame that enables both vertical and horizontal motions of the carriage. The carriage is outfitted with a drive system and instrumentation to measure the sinkage, stress, and drawbar pull values required for a terramechanics characterization. Initial stress-sinkage curves for three different scroll configurations align with expected results and provide a proof of concept that the proposed apparatus can successfully measure differing geometric parameters and can be used for further terramechanics characterizations.
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 | 0.001 | 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