Elastic Buckling of Multiwall Carbon Nanotubes under High Pressure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper studies elastic buckling of individual multiwall carbon nanotubes under radial pressure. The analysis is based on a multiple-elastic-shell model in which each of the concentric tubes of a multiwall carbon nanotube is described as an individual elastic shell. According to their radius-to-thickness ratios, the multiwall carbon nanotubes discussed here are classified into three types: thin, thick, and (almost) solid. The critical pressure for elastic buckling is calculated for examples of all three types. It is found that a thin N-wall nanotube (defined by a radius-to-thickness ratio larger than 4) is approximately equivalent to a single-layer elastic shell whose effective bending stiffness and thickness are N times the effective bending stiffness and thickness of single-wall carbon nanotubes. Based on this result, an approximate method is suggested for replacing the problematic multiwall nanotube of many layers with a multilayer elastic shell of fewer layers. In particular, the critical pressure predicted by the present model is in good agreement with known experimental 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".