Dynamics of a Laminated Composite Beam on Pasternak-Viscoelastic Foundation Subjected to a Moving Oscillator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dynamic behavior of a laminated composite beam (LCB) supported by a generalized Pasternak-type viscoelastic foundation, subjected to a moving two-degree-of-freedom (DOFs) oscillator with a constant axial velocity is studied. Analytical solution using the Galerkin method is sought and the couplings of the bending—tension, shear—tension, and bending—twist with the Poisson effect are considered. The possible separation of the moving oscillator from LCB during the course of motion is investigated by monitoring the contact force between the oscillator and LCB. The effects of the non-rigid foundation, oscillator parameters, and the load speed on the separation are also studied. It is found that the separation of the oscillator from the slender LCB will occur with a high stiffness of the oscillator and by having either a low or a high axial momentum of the oscillator. The separation can be suppressed by an elastic foundation with a relatively large stiffness. The bending moment and the beam deflection at the beam center and just below the oscillator due to the load velocity and position are examined and the corresponding velocity for the maximum values of those parameters is determined.
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".