MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W64795701 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2006-0025

TIP-OVER RESPONSES OF HYDRAULIC MOBILE CRANES

2006· article· en· W64795701 on OpenAlexaffvenue
R. F. Abo-Shanab, Nariman Sepehri

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTruckOutriggerBoomEngineeringExcavatorMarine engineeringSuspension (topology)Structural engineeringTrack (disk drive)Base (topology)Automotive engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this paper is to develop a complete simulation model and study the tip-over responses of mobile cranes. The developed model takes into account all factors that could affect the overturning of truck cranes including: (i) detailed dynamics of the manipulator links and the base that can potentially rock back and forth, (ii) combined vehicle suspension and ground-tire compliance, (iii) condition of the ground under the wheels or the outrigger pontoons, (iv) friction between the outriggers/tires and the ground, (v) spatial motion of load carried, via a rope, by the telescopic boom of the truck crane, and (vi) hydraulic drive system. The model also includes the effect of the presence of the wheels that can support the machine in case of ground failure at any of the outrigger pontoons, and therefore is capable of predicting subsequent responses in case of soil failure under the crane supports. Simulation results are presented to understand tip-over responses of a typical mobile crane in the presence of load lifting, load swivel, ground failure and various ground conditions. The model developed in this paper is shown to be capable of producing detailed information about the machine responses, the reaction forces at crane’ supports and the state parameters of drive system to various input scenarios. The acquired information could additionally be used for improving the design of the cranes in general.

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 score0.783
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicDynamics and Control of Mechanical SystemsFrench-language works237,207