Brake Particle Emission Influenced by Grooved Disc Friction Surfaces with or without a Hard Coating
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many performance sport passenger vehicles use drilled or grooved cast iron brake rotors for a better braking performance or a cosmetic reason. Such brake rotors would unfortunately cause more brake dust emission, appearing with dirty wheel rims. To better understand the effects of such brake rotors on particle emission, a pin-on-disc tribometer with two particle emission measurement devices was used to monitor and collect the emitted airborne particles. The first device was an aerodynamic particle sizer, which is capable of measuring particles ranging from 0.5 to 20 μm. The second device was a condensation particle counter, which measures and collects particles from 4 nm to 3 μm. The testing samples were scaled-down brake discs (100 mm in diameter) against low-metallic brake pads. Two machined surface conditions (plain and grooved) with uncoated or ceramic-coated friction surfaces were selected for the investigation. The results showed that the grooved friction surface led to a higher particle emission than a plain friction surface finish. The ceramic coating can indeed reduce the negative effect of the grooving through reductions of both the brake wear and particle emission.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".