Nonlinear vibration of fluid-conveying carbon nanotube using homotopy analysis method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nonlinear vibration analysis of a single-walled carbon nanotube, using the Eringen nonlocal elasticity and Euler-Bernoulli beam theories, is carried out. Pasternak-type foundation and the simply-supported boundary conditions are assumed for the carbon nanotube and the governing equation of motion is developed using those theories. The Galerkin method is utilized to obtain the nonlinear ordinary differential equation of vibration of the single-walled carbon nanotube and the homotopy analysis method is employed to determine its nonlinear natural frequency. A parametric sensitivity study is then carried out. Few of the parameters were the axial tension, nonlocal parameter, fluid velocity and the foundation stiffness. The parametric study is mainly focused on the nonlinear natural frequency of single-walled carbon nanotube. Finally, a numerical simulation is carried out to determine the accuracy of the obtained results. Furthermore, an elliptical integral is utilized to verify the nonlinear natural frequency, which was obtained using the homotopy analysis method.
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) | 0.002 | 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".