Closed-cell polyurethane in-situ foaming honeycomb for enhanced energy absorption and water intrusion resistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To achieve novel core with high energy absorption and strong water intrusion resistance, a composite structure was created by employing in-situ foaming of closed-cell polyurethane (PU) in a honeycomb structure. Experimental, theoretical, and finite element analyses revealed that the in-situ foaming technique increased the honeycomb's energy absorption by 312.84 % and improved impact efficiency by 61.45 % while maintaining specific energy absorption (SEA). Remarkably, this composite structure surpassed the energy absorption capacity of individual honeycomb and foam. The coupling gain ratio introduced by the foam increases within a certain range as the honeycomb cell size decreases and wall thickness increases, with little influence from the foam's mechanical properties. Water intrusion, leading to ice formation at low temperatures, drastically reduced honeycomb SEA by 94.61 % and impaired mechanical properties significantly. Closed-cell PU in-situ foaming provided exceptional water intrusion resistance, preserving the honeycomb's mechanical performance, including energy absorption and SEA. • Designed a reinforced core HPU based on honeycomb structure. • Closed-cell PU in-situ foamed honeycomb increases energy absorption by 312.84 %. • Closed-cell PU foam enhances honeycomb's water intrusion resistance. • Explored coupling effects between foam and honeycomb of HPU. • Conducted theoretical and FE analysis of HPU.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".