MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4290502357 · doi:10.3390/machines10080665

Low-Velocity Impact Resistance of Double-Layer Folded Sandwich Structure

2022· article· en· W4290502357 on OpenAlexaff
Yuechen Duan, Zhiren Zhan, Ting Zou, Ying Tie, Zhen Cui, Tingting Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueMachines · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCellular and Composite Structures
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsStiffnessMaterials scienceCore (optical fiber)Composite materialAluminiumImpact resistanceFinite element methodLayer (electronics)Impact energyStructural engineeringSandwich panelDouble layer (biology)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The folded sandwich structure might inevitably be impacted at low velocity when it is working, which will lead to the decline of the mechanical properties. The low-velocity impact resistance of the double-layer V-shaped aluminium folded sandwich structure is researched by the finite element method. It was found that the damage mode and the proportion of energy absorption of the double-layer and single-layer folded sandwich structures are different under low-velocity impact, and the impact stiffness and energy-absorbing capacity of the double-layer structure are better than those of the single-layer structure when the impact energy is small. In addition, in view of the low-velocity impact response characteristics of the double-layer V-shaped aluminum folded sandwich structure, two methods are proposed to improve its impact stiffness. Both methods ensure that the total mass of the structure remains unchanged. One method keeps the inner panel still and changes the wall thickness distribution of the top and bottom cores, and the wall thickness of the top core is increased. The other method keeps the wall thickness of the cores unchanged, and the inner panel is moved upward. From the finite element results, it can be seen that after increasing the wall thickness of the top core from 0.25 mm to 0.4 mm, the maximum impact distance of the impactor decreases by 30.3% when the impact energy is 5 J, and it decreases by 23.1% when the impact energy is 10 J, and with 20 J, it decreases by 14.5%. After reducing the height of the top core from 12.5 mm to 5 mm, the maximum impact distance of the impactor is reduced by 22.86% when the impact energy is 5 J, 21.85% when the impact energy is 10 J, and 20.51% when the impact energy is 40 J. The improvement is obvious. The two methods can increase the equivalent density of the top core, which can increase the stiffness of the top core. For the double-layer structure, the stiffness of the top core near the impact point has a greater influence on the low-velocity impact resistance of the entire structure.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMachinesSame topicCellular and Composite StructuresFrench-language works237,207