ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Lightweight and High-Strength Sandwich Panels: Materials, Core Architectures, Manufacturing, Mechanical Performance, Multifunctionality and Future Perspectives.
Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lightweight and high-strength sandwich panels are used across aerospace, transportation, marine, energy, civil and protective systems because large face separation can provide high flexural rigidity and specific load capacity at low mass. This review treats the panel as a coupled material-structure-interface-process system rather than ranking core topology in isolation. A scoping-review workflow was updated to 24 July 2026 and yielded a curated evidence corpus of 112 total references. The review reports the search and screening logic explicitly, uses descriptive rather than field-wide bibliometric claims, and organizes the synthesis around component roles, governing mechanisms, connection regions, performance requirements and application-driven selection. Conventional foam, honeycomb and corrugated cores are compared with lattice-truss, auxetic, origami/kirigami, hierarchical, bio-inspired, graded and triply periodic minimal-surface (TPMS) architectures. Particular emphasis is placed on face-core and nodal junctions, static and dynamic failure-mode competition, fatigue and environmental degradation, fire/thermal/acoustic functions, additive-manufacturing defects, modelling fidelity, and active/adaptive concepts using shape-memory alloys and piezoelectric actuation. Cross-study numerical envelopes that could not be traced to harmonized test conditions are not used as universal rankings; instead, a mechanism-based screening matrix identifies design strengths, limitations and reporting requirements. The synthesis indicates that engineering deployment depends on preserving intended load paths in the as-manufactured panel, controlling interfaces and defects, validating multi-hazard durability and connections at scale, and integrating multifunctional or adaptive functions without creating new weak links.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.