Morphing of Bistable Composite Laminates Using Distributed Piezoelectric Actuators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of bistable unsymmetric cross-ply laminates for morphing application has received growing attention in the last few years. So far, most studies use large rectangular piezoelectric Macro Fiber Composite (MFC) patches bonded at the center of the laminate to induce snap-through. However, the use of large rectangular MFC patches bonded in the center of the laminates significantly influences the shape of the laminate by greatly reducing the curvature at the midsection of the laminate where the MFC patches are bonded. This paper presents a study where narrow cocured MFC strips distributed over the entire surface are used to induce snap-through of unsymmetric cross-ply laminates. This MFC configuration allows having a more uniform curvature in the laminate. Since the strips are bonded on both sides, reverse snap-through should be obtained. The study was both theoretical and experimental. A finite element nonlinear analysis was used to predict the two stable cylindrical configurations and the snap-through induced by MFC actuation. For the experimental study, a laminate-MFC structure was manufactured and tested. The shapes were measured using a 3D image correlation system as a function of applied voltage. Good correlations for the cylindrical shape and displacement field were observed.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".