Interfacial Thermal Stresses in Bimaterial Elastic Beams: Modified Beam Models Revisited
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A simple non-local modified beam model is presented to evaluate interfacial thermal stresses in bimaterial elastic beams. The model has its root in an earlier model (Suhir 1986) which assumes that the longitudinal interfacial displacement at a point depends on the interfacial shear stress at that point. Different than that earlier local model, however, the present non-local model assumes that the longitudinal interfacial displacement at a point also depends on the second gradient of the interfacial shear stress at that point. The present model satisfies both the zero-longitudinal force and the zero-shear stress boundary conditions at the free edges, and the interfacial peeling stress given by the present model is self-equilibrated. Remarkably, the present model leads to a fourth-order differential equation for the interfacial shear stress, and is considerably simpler than other known modified beam models satisfying the abovementioned conditions. This desirable feature of the present model is believed to be significant especially when the model is applied to multilayered materials. In particular, the interfacial shear stress given by the present model is found to be in reasonably good agreement with some known numerical results.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".