Self-balanced Vertical Shelving Carousel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report presents the final design of the Self-Balanced Carousel project facilitated between Vidir Solutions and the University of Manitoba. The goal of the project was to design a self-balancing upgrade to Vidir’s vertical shelving carousel, such that each carrier maintains its inclination at any given time or position. This would prevent issues caused by uneven shelf loading. The final design presented in the report is broken down into four major components. A guide track, pictured in red, was added to both side towers of the carousel. Each track requires a set of mounting brackets, shown in cyan. On either side of each shelf, we added a wheel, shown in blue. Finally, we redesigned the shelf-chain connection, pictured in pink, to be compatible with the track. The strength of the components was evaluated with a preliminary finite element analysis, as applicable. The tracks and wheels work together to constrain each shelf, preventing swaying and tilting. The guide tracks constrain the position of the shelf’s wheels, which in turn constrains the rotation of the whole shelf. The tracks allow the wheels to move in tandem with the shelf’s pivoting axis, as driven by the carousel’s main chain system. Beyond solving the main problem, our design addresses key concerns discovered over the course of the project. By putting guide tracks on both carousel towers and not having mirror symmetry, the two superimpose to provide total coverage for the entire carousel rotation. A reworked shelf-chain connection facilitates shelf installation with a much smaller overall profile, minimizing the effect of necessary gaps in each guide track. The lower portion of the track is adjustable to accommodate the carousel’s chain tensioning mechanism. The design satisfactorily meets the project specifications. Notably, we performed a motion simulation and determined that the design limited the shelf’s tilt to ≤2.5° in both clockwise and counterclockwise motion around the carousel. Our design comes in below budget, with a total material cost estimate of $687.19. We recommend Vidir manufacture a prototype to test impact between the track and wheel where gaps in the track exist, a specification we were unable to conclusively model.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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".