DSDaniela Szpaczyńska

Daniela Szpaczyńska

*This is an algorithmically generated author record based on publicly available information.

Current Organizations / Institutes

The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article


Daniela Szpaczyńska has a total of 4 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:


Latest Publications

  • Open Access

    Comparison of Multi-Tracked Running Gears in Terms of Obstacle Negotiation Capabilities

    by Daniela Szpaczyńska, Mirosław Przybysz, Tomasz Muszyński

    This paper concerns lightweight—up to 800 kg—UGVs (unmanned ground vehicles), where multi-tracked running gears are used to improve the obstacle negotiation performance. A comparison of four different multi-tracked systems and, for reference, classic tracked running gear is presented. Simulations in a multi-body dynamics program were performed, where running gear solutions overcame three typical obstacles and were assessed using a total of five effectiveness and functionality criteria. The simulation models took into account the variable track–ground contact surface. The ground parameters were validated by means of experimental tests for grassy terrain. In the results, the most advantageous solutions in each category are indicated, and design guidelines for increasing the obstacle-overcoming capabilities of multi-tracked UGVs are presented.


  • Open Access

    Susceptibility Modeling of a Rubber Track for Lightweight Mobile Robots

    by Daniela Szpaczyńska, Marian Janusz Łopatka, Piotr Krogul

    The elastic-damping properties of the rubber track structure can have a significant impact on the running gear performance of lightweight mobile robots. Taking these properties into account is particularly important for modeling obstacle negotiation and estimating the robot’s driving force. The article presents track susceptibility identification using both static and dynamic tests. The experimental results were used to validate the multi-body dynamics model of the rubber track for three modeling methods and for three track link number model variants. The methods and variants were compared by the accuracy of the susceptibility parameters obtained using them. The impact of the modeling methods on the track bending resistance simulations was also checked.