Quasi-static compressive behaviour of Bézier function-based body-centred cubic lattice sandwich structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To improve the energy absorption performance of single-layer body-centred cubic (BCC) lattice sandwich structures, this study proposes a design method for a Bézier function-defined body-centred cubic lattice core (BCCB). By conducting screening, the unit cell with excellent energy-absorbing performance is obtained. The mechanical response and energy-absorbing mechanism under quasi-static compression are analysed in conjunction with finite-element simulation, and the effect of rod diameter is also explored. It has been demonstrated that the single-layer BCCB lattice sandwich structure exhibits a layered deformation mechanism under compressive loading, enhancing the energy-absorbing capacity through the alternating formation of plastic hinges in the upper and lower parts of the unit cell, the bending deformation of rods, and the interaction between the core and panels. The increase in diameter enhances both the initial stiffness and energy absorption of the structure; however, its effect on specific energy absorption (SEA) remains limited due to the material’s ductility constraints. Additionally, for the single-layer BCCB lattice sandwich structure with SEA in this study, the deformation mode is minimally affected by changes in diameter.
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".