Layer Arrangement Impact on the Electromechanical Performance of a Five‐Layer Multifunctional Smart Sandwich Plate
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter deals with the impact of layer arrangement on the design of five-layer multifunctional smart sandwich plates (5LMSSPs) under electromechanical loads. The layers of the considered smart plate are made of porous polymeric, functionally graded (FG) graphene platelet (GPL)/polymer nanocomposite and piezoceramic materials. The porous polymeric layer, which is the thickest layer, is considered as core to significantly reduce structural weight. Due to the brittle structure of piezoceramics, considering those layers as the outer layer is not always the best set of layer arrangement. By developing a mesh-free solution, a comparison study has been conducted to explore the impact of changing the location of piezoceramics from faces to middle layers on the electromechanical performances of 5LMSSPs. The mechanical properties of GPL/polymer nanocomposite layers are estimated by employing Halpin–Tsai equations to capture the shape of nanofillers. In the mesh-free method, the shape functions of moving least squares (MLSs) are used to approximate the displacement field of such smart plates. Displacement field is defined by an efficient third-order shear deformation theory (TSDT) of plates proposed by Reddy which has only five degrees of freedom. By minimizing total energy function, the mesh-free forms of the coupled electromechanical governing equations of 5LMSSPs are extracted. The impacts of layer arrangement and other design parameters on the electromechanical performances of 5LMSSPs has been investigated in this chapter.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.026 | 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 it