Bandgap formation mechanisms in periodic materials and structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bandgaps are frequency intervals of no wave propagation for mechanical waves. Spatial periodicity provides one mechanism for the emergence of bandgaps in periodic composite materials such as lattice materials, phononic crystals, and acoustic metamaterials. Coupling a propagating wave in a periodic medium with a local resonator provides an alternate mechanism for bandgap emergence. This study examines these two band-gap formation mechanisms using a receptance coupling technique. The receptance coupling technique yields closed-form expressions for the location of bandgaps and their width. Numerical simulations of Blochwaves are presented for the Bragg and sub-Bragg bandgaps and compared with the bounding frequency predictions given by the receptance analysis of the unitcell dynamics. It is observed that the introduction of periodic local resonators narrows Bragg bandgaps above the local resonant bandgap. Introduction of two fold periodicity is shown to widen the Bragg bandgap, thus expanding the design space. The generality of the receptance technique presented here allows straightforward extension to higher dimensional systems with multiple degrees of freedom coupling. Implication of this study for Nano-Electro-Mechanical Systems (NEMS) will be discussed.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".