A Rational Procedure for Designing a Hybrid Fiber-Reinforced Plastic Mast
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the fact that carbon fiber-reinforced plastic masts are now the desired choice for those involved in sailing (both racing and super-yachts), their development is based on rule of thumbs and often the experience of those who sail such vessels. Surprisingly, there are no specific design standards, nor any specific procedures for proof testing such composite structural components. As a results, the currently available masts in the market are often over-designed and therefore, costly. The developers of these masts often do not take advantage of the tailorability and beneficial properties of various fiber-reinforced plastic composite materials. This paper outlines the details of a rational analytical procedure developed for the design of a hybrid composite mast for the YD-40 sailboat. The loading conditions are identified, systematically, based on the NBS standards. The methodology is based on considering the global stability of the mast, via of an eigen value solution arranged for predicting the global buckling failure of the mast. The developed procedure is also implemented, in an iterative mode, into a spreadsheet program. The integrity of this design procedure is also verified using a finite element analysis.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".