MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W261082673 · doi:10.1007/0-306-46935-9_20

On the Theory of Smart Composite Structures

2005· book-chapter· en· W261082673 on OpenAlex
Alexander L. Kalamkarov, Aleksey D. Drozdov

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueKluwer Academic Publishers eBooks · 2005
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Structure Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsTechnical University of Nova Scotia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActuatorDeflection (physics)Smart materialVibration controlStructural engineeringComposite numberLimitingFinite element methodEngineeringCantileverRigidity (electromagnetism)Beam (structure)VibrationMechanical engineeringComputer scienceMaterials sciencePhysicsAcousticsClassical mechanicsElectrical engineeringAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present paper is concerned with the basic aspects of a newly suggested theory of smart composite structures based on the continuum mechanics approach. The governing equations describing the behavior of a smart composite structures incorporating sensors and actuators are derived, and the basic optimization problems in the design of these controllable structures are formulated. This theory deals mainly with the extremal features of the controllable smart structures. The objective of modeling is to determine limiting properties of the smart structure. This also allows to determine whether the properties of the presently existing materials, sensors and actuators are sufficient for the optimal design of smart structure, or the development of some new materials, sensors or actuators is required. The basic optimization problems for the smart composite structures are illustrated by three examples in which the three main sources of control are emphasized. These are the residual strains, material properties, and the geometry of a structure. In the first example, we derive the optimal residual stress in an actuator which provides the minimum deflection of a composite cantilevered beam under static loading. It is shown that the effect of actuator allows to reduce the maximum deflection by 28 times compared with the same beam without active control. The second example is concerned with the optimal design of the controllable Winkler’s foundation in the problem of vibration damping for a simply supported beam under the dynamic loading. The controllable property here is a rigidity of foundation. It is shown that by using the optimally designed controllable foundation, the maximum deflection of a beam can be reduced by about 8 times. The third example deals with the optimal design of an actuator for a smart composite beam. The objective is to reduce the maximum deflection by applying a constant residual strain to the actuator. It is shown, in particular, that for the strains which exceed the obtained critical value, the optimal length of the actuator is smaller than the length of the beam, and it diminishes up to zero with the growth of the applied strain.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.486
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.188 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it