Finite element buckling analysis of laminated composite sandwich panels with transversely flexible core carrying attached elastic strip
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, a three-dimensional finite element model is proposed to study the effect of distributed attached mass with thickness and stiffness on the buckling instability of sandwich panels with transversely flexible cores. Unlike the previous works in the literature which have made use of unified displacement theories, the present model uses different types of finite elements to model the core and the face sheets. It utilizes shell elements for the face sheets and three-dimensional solid elements for the core which enables the model to account for the transverse flexibility of the structure. The motions of the face sheets and the core as well as the attached mass are related through defining constraint equations between the nodes of their respective finite elements based on the concept of master and slave nodes which is incorporated into the finite element analysis program ANSYS through a user-defined subroutine. The validated finite element model is then used to study the effects of size, thickness, material property, aspect ratio, and the position of the attached mass on the buckling load of a sandwich panel under different combinations of boundary conditions. The results presented in this study have hitherto not been reported in the literature.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".