BUCKLING OF LAMINATED COMPOSITE PLATE UNDER BIAXIAL LOADING CONDITIONS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The buckling behavior of laminated composite plates subjected to biaxial loading conditions was examined using theoretical, numerical and experimental approaches. For experimental work, a special plate specimen was developed. Deflection characteristics using different boundary conditions of the postbuckled plates were also experimentally investigated to obtain admissible analytical deflection functions and boundary conditions for the theoretical and numerical analyses. Non-linear finite element analysis (N-FEA) was carried out for the two types of boundary conditions, i.e., uniform pressure and uniform end-shortening, to approximate the actual boundary conditions of the plate in experiments. Comparing experimental results with the two N-FEA results for the two different boundary conditions, it was found that results using N-FEA with the uniform pressure loading condition agreed better with experimental results. Effects of flexural stiffness ratio, ζ, induced from the stacking sequence variation, were investigated through non-linear finite element analyses. It was found that ζ has an effect on the critical buckling load for high values of It also has an effect on the postbuckling behavior.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".