MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401069098 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2024-0087

Numerical and experimental study on adaptive stiffness yaw damper for suppressing abnormal vibration of high-speed trains

2024· article· en· W4401069098 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhaotuan Guo, Liangcheng Dai, Maoru Chi, Yixiao Li, Jianfeng Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Engineering and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDamperVibrationTrainStiffnessStructural engineeringTuned mass damperHigh speed trainControl theory (sociology)EngineeringComputer scienceAcousticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mismatch between the parameters of the yaw damper and the equivalent conicity of wheel rail contact can lead to abnormal vibration of rail vehicles, while the stiffness variation range of traditional yaw dampers is very small, covering a limited range of equivalent conicity of wheel rail contact, resulting in the risk of carbody hunting at low conicity and bogie hunting at high conicity. To overcome the abovementioned shortcomings of traditional yaw dampers and reduce the abnormal vibration of high-speed trains under various operating conditions, this study proposes an adaptive stiffness yaw damper. The effectiveness of this solution was confirmed through roller testing rig and multi-body dynamic simulations. The results show that the device can dynamically adjust the stiffness according to the operating conditions of the vehicle, effectively reducing the carbody and bogie hunting under extreme wheel rail contact conditions, and thereby reducing the abnormal vibration of high-speed trains. At the same time, this device helps reconcile the trade-off between the curve negotiation performance and stability of vehicle, indirectly lessening the requirement for wheel–rail maintenance and reducing operational and maintenance expenses.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicRailway Engineering and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207