Finite element buckling analysis of laminated composite sandwich panels with transversely flexible core containing a face/core debond
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, a new three-dimensional finite element modeling approach with less computing time and space is introduced to study the buckling behavior of sandwich panels, containing a face–core debond. The finite element model presented in this study relates the motion of the face sheets to the core through constraint equations utilizing the concept of slave and master nodes, thus representing a more realistic model of the sandwich panel. The composite face sheets are modeled with shell elements, and the core is modeled using the 3D structural solid elements capable of taking transverse flexibility into consideration. In order to model the debond, the constraints between the nodes of the face sheet and the core are removed and replaced with contact elements in the debonded region to avoid interpenetration. The model is validated through comparison with experimental results reported in the literature. The validated model is then used to study the effects of the size, shape, aspect ratio of the debond, as well as fiber orientation of the face sheets and the influence of core stiffness on the buckling load of the panel subject to different boundary conditions on the top and bottom face sheets of the panel.
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 | 0.000 | 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".