Files
Atomizer/projects/hydrotech-beam/kb/components/sandwich-beam.md
Antoine 9541958eae Restructure Hydrotech Beam project — KB-integrated layout
New project structure with knowledge base integration:
- kb/ with components, materials, fea, dev generations
- models/ for reference NX files (golden copies)
- studies/ for self-contained optimization campaigns
- deliverables/ for final outputs
- DECISIONS.md decision log (6 decisions tracked)
- BREAKDOWN.md (moved from 1_breakdown/)
- Gen 001 created from intake + technical breakdown

KB extension file: atomizer/shared/skills/knowledge-base-atomizer-ext.md

Refs: DEC-HB-004, DEC-HB-005, DEC-HB-006
2026-02-09 02:18:29 +00:00

2.4 KiB
Raw Blame History

Sandwich Beam

Type: Primary structural component Material: Steel (AISI) — see steel-aisi.md Status: Baseline documented, optimization pending


Description

Sandwich I-beam serving as primary load-bearing member in a test fixture assembly. Cross-section features a core layer flanked by face sheets on top and bottom flanges. Web contains a pattern of lightening holes (circular cutouts) to reduce mass.

Specifications

Parameter Value Units Source
Mass (baseline) ~974 kg NX expression p173
Tip displacement (baseline) ~22 mm SOL 101 result
Half-core thickness 20 (baseline) mm DV range: 1040
Face thickness 20 (baseline) mm DV range: 1040
Hole diameter 300 (baseline) mm DV range: 150450
Hole count 10 (baseline) DV range: 515 (integer)
Beam length TBD mm Gap G1
Support conditions TBD Gap G1

Structural Behavior

From Technical Breakdown (Gen 001):

The beam is bending-dominated:

Behavior Governing Parameters Notes
Bending stiffness (EI) Face thickness, core thickness Faces carry bending stress, core carries shear. Stiffness scales ~quadratically with distance from neutral axis
Mass All four variables Core and face add material; holes remove material from web
Stress concentrations Hole diameter, hole spacing Larger holes → higher SCF at edges. Closely spaced holes can interact
Shear capacity Core thickness, hole count, diameter Holes reduce shear-carrying area

Design Variable Interactions

  1. Core × Face — classic sandwich interaction. Optimal stiffness balances core depth (lever arm) vs face material (bending resistance)
  2. Hole diameter × Hole count — both remove web material. Large + many could leave insufficient ligament width
  3. Face × Hole diameter — thicker faces reduce nominal stress, allowing larger holes
  4. Core × Hole diameter — core thickness determines web height, constrains max feasible hole diameter

Key Risk

⚠️ Baseline FAILS displacement constraint (22 mm vs 10 mm target). Optimizer must increase stiffness by >50% while reducing mass. Feasible region may be tight.

History

  • Gen 001 (2026-02-09): Initial documentation from intake + technical breakdown