In-Plane Bending and Failure Mechanism of Sandwich Beams with GFRP Skins and Soft Polyurethane Foam Core
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The out-of-plane bending of sandwich panels has been widely investigated, but studies on their behavior under in-plane loading are quite scarce. In this study, 18 sandwich beam specimens were tested under three- and four-point in-plane-bending. The specimens are composed of low-density polyurethane core and glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) skins on both sides. The shear span-to-depth (a/h) ratio was varied from 1.33 to 4.67. Two different skin thicknesses were also used, providing beam depth-to-skin thickness (h/t) ratios of 47 and 94. It was found that the ultimate moment reduced by approximately one third as the a/h ratio increased from 1.33 to 4.67 in sandwich beams with an h/t ratio of 94 and decreased by about one quarter in beams with an h/t ratio of 47. Doubling the skin thickness [i.e., from h/t of 94–47] increased the moment capacity significantly. The percentage increase ranged from 55 to 95% as a/h increased from 1.33 to 4.67. Failure of sandwich beams occurred by skin wrinkling in compression, mostly symmetrically, where skins move in opposite directions. A simplified analytical model accounting for shear and flexural rigidities of the sandwich beam and a skin wrinkling failure criterion in compression was developed and validated against experimental results.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it