MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390344405 · doi:10.1177/09544070231210036

Influence of sand moisture content on mixed service truck tire performance using advanced hybrid techniques

2023· article· en· W4390344405 on OpenAlexaff
Zeinab El-Sayegh

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part D Journal of Automobile Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics Simulations and Interactions
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater contentFinite element methodGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceGeotechnicsRolling resistanceTruckGranular materialEnvironmental scienceEngineeringStructural engineeringComposite materialAutomotive engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on investigating the effect of sand moisture content on the performance of a Mixed Service Drive (MSD) truck tire of size 315/80R22.5. The truck tire is modeled using multiple layers and materials within a Finite Element Analysis (FEA) environment. Moist sand is modeled using the Smoothed-Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) technique. Initially, dry sand is modeled using a hydrodynamic elastic-plastic material, while water is modeled using the Murnaghan equation of state. The numerical interaction between the sand and water is identified using Darcy’s law. The moisture content of the sand is then calibrated using direct shear-strength tests and validated against physical measurements conducted in a laboratory under similar sand conditions. The tire-sand interaction is defined using a hybrid FEA-SPH interaction model, and a non-symmetric node-to-segment contact with edge treatment contact algorithm. The tire tractive performance including tractive effort, motion resistance coefficient, and tire sinkage was examined under various operating conditions, including different sand moisture content levels and tire longitudinal speeds.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part D Journal of Automobile EngineeringSame topicFluid Dynamics Simulations and InteractionsFrench-language works237,207