Alternative String-Trimmer Starting Device
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A mechanical string trimmer starter is designed in collaboration with Goodwill Industries of San Antonio, so that Goodwill can employ people with limited hand-arm dexterity who would otherwise be turned away from a string trimming (landscaping) job. The power spring based mechanical string trimmer started design includes a 6.58" x 7.08" x 7.92" aluminum box that is attachable to the rear surface of the string trimmer via a custom made aluminum attachment. The design comprises of three subsystems – the energy input, energy storage, and the energy release subsystems. The device allows the operator to compress a plunger (rack) repeatedly to store the energy in a power spring and release the accumulated energy using a ratchet mechanism. The overall design, weighing 16 lbm, requires 30-40 complete plunge compression cycles, with the force required to press the rack increasing successively as the spring charges. The maximum force of 30 lbf is required to push the plunger during the final plunge cycle. The design provides a torque of over 100 in-lbf and angular frequency of 3 total to the engine's crankshaft, sufficient to start a cold engine based on the tests performed on the Shindaiwa T272 trimmer.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.007 |
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".