MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Realization of Efficient Rotational Springs and Series Elastic Actuators Using DC Motors

2024· article· en· W4400976535 on OpenAlexaff
Amin Farjah, Mehrdad Moallem

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanics and Biomechanics Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActuatorRealization (probability)DC motorSeries (stratigraphy)Control theory (sociology)Brushed DC electric motorComputer scienceControl engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineeringAC motorElectrical engineeringMathematicsElectric motorArtificial intelligenceGeologyControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a review of adjustable rotational springs is presented along with their application in robotic systems. To this end, the process of implementing an adjustable rotational spring using DC motors and their limitations is presented. Additionally, Series Elastic Actuators (SEAs) as one of the important applications of an adjustable spring are investigated. A review of motor parameters and their effect on achievable stiffness values is presented using available DC motors in the market. Finally, Simulations and comparative studies are presented using MATLAB/Simulink to show that correct selection of the series spring plays a significant role in achieving an efficient SEA with a relatively good stiffness tunability. To this end, a comprehensive parametric sweep study is conducted over different parameters such as amplitude of the rotational deflection, angular velocity, inertia of the rotor, and gearbox ratio of the motor. The findings of this study, facilitates the road for a systematical development of SEAs for various robotic applications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMechanics and Biomechanics StudiesFrench-language works237,207