Fabrication, testing and modeling of a new flexible armor inspired from natural fish scales and osteoderms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crocodiles, armadillo, turtles, fish and many other animal species have evolved flexible armored skins in the form of hard scales or osteoderms, which can be described as hard plates of finite size embedded in softer tissues. The individual hard segments provide protection from predators, while the relative motion of these segments provides the flexibility required for efficient locomotion. In this work, we duplicated these broad concepts in a bio-inspired segmented armor. Hexagonal segments of well-defined size and shape were carved within a thin glass plate using laser engraving. The engraved plate was then placed on a soft substrate which simulated soft tissues, and then punctured with a sharp needle mounted on a miniature loading stage. The resistance of our segmented armor was significantly higher when smaller hexagons were used, and our bio-inspired segmented glass displayed an increase in puncture resistance of up to 70% compared to a continuous plate of glass of the same thickness. Detailed structural analyses aided by finite elements revealed that this extraordinary improvement is due to the reduced span of individual segments, which decreases flexural stresses and delays fracture. This effect can however only be achieved if the plates are at least 1000 stiffer than the underlying substrate, which is the case for natural armor systems. Our bio-inspired system also displayed many of the attributes of natural armors: flexible, robust with 'multi-hit' capabilities. This new segmented glass therefore suggests interesting bio-inspired strategies and mechanisms which could be systematically exploited in high-performance flexible armors. This study also provides new insights and a better understanding of the mechanics of natural armors such as scales and osteoderms.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".