New predictive models for ballistic limit of spacecraft honeycomb-core sandwich panels subjected to hypervelocity impact
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parameters of the honeycomb core (such as cell size and foil thickness), as well as the material of the core, influence the ballistic performance of honeycomb-core sandwich panels in cases of hypervelocity impact (HVI) by orbital debris. Two predictive models capable of accounting for this influence have been developed in this study: one utilized a conventional approach based on a dedicated ballistic limit equation, while the other employed an artificial neural network trained to predict the outcomes of HVI on HCSP. BLE fitting and ANN training were conducted using a database composed of 46 numerical experiments, performed with a validated numerical model and ten physical tests derived from the literature. The new ballistic limit equation is based on the Whipple shield BLE, in which the standoff distance between the facesheets was replaced by a function of the honeycomb cell size, foil thickness, and yield strength of the HC material. The corresponding fit factors were determined by minimizing the sum of squared errors between the BLE predictions and the results of HVI tests listed in the database. The BLE was then tested against a new set of simulation data and demonstrated an excellent predictive accuracy, with the discrepancy ranging from 1.13% to 5.58% only. The artificial neural network was developed using MATLAB's Deep Learning Toolbox framework and was trained utilizing the same HCSP HVI database as was employed for the BLE fitting. The ANN demonstrated a very good predictive accuracy, when tested against a set of simulation data not previously used in the training of the network, with the discrepancy ranging from 0.67% to 7.27%. Both of the developed predictive models (the BLE and the ANN) are recommended for use in the design of orbital debris shielding for spacecraft, involving honeycomb-core sandwich panels.
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 | 0.002 | 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".