Evaluation of Fibre-Matrix Interfacial Strength in a SiC Fibre-Reinforced Ti-6A1–4V Composite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A high resolution depth sensing indentation instrument, developed at NRC, called the Nanomechanical Probe, was used to conduct fibre push-out (FPO) tests on a SiC fibre-reinforced Ti-6A1–4V composite, produced by a spray method. Samples were tested in the as-fabricated state, after heat treatment and after hot isostatic pressing (HIPing). In all cases, load-displacement plots obtained from the FPO tests showed an initial linear increase in the load with displacement which was followed by a sudden drop of the load. This drop was attributed to failure of the fibre-matrix interface and the start of sliding of the fibre out of the matrix. Scanning electron microscopic examination of the samples after the test showed tested fibres protruding from the sample as a result of sliding during the FPO test. The maximum load values, obtained before the sudden drop, were used in a model to calculate the fibre-matrix interfacial strength. The results indicated that the interfacial strength of the HIPed sample was more than five times higher than that of the as-fabricated sample. The heat treatment, on the other hand, was found to reduce the strength by a factor of two as compared to the as-fabricated material.
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 | 0.001 | 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".