MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973620112 · doi:10.1002/pc.22290

Capillary effects in vacuum‐assisted resin transfer molding with natural fibers

2012· article· en· W1973620112 on OpenAlexafffund
Gastón Francucci, Analı́a Vázquez, Édu Ruiz, E. Rodríguez

Bibliographic record

VenuePolymer Composites · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEpoxy Resin Curing Processes
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersSecretaria de Ciencia y Tecnica, Universidad de Buenos AiresConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y TécnicasGovernment of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceTransfer moldingComposite materialCapillary actionCapillary pressureComposite numberPermeability (electromagnetism)PorosityVoid (composites)Molding (decorative)Porous mediumMold

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The study of the capillary flow developed during the processing of composite materials is key because it acts as an important driving force for the impregnation of the fiber tows. It is also the main mechanism of void formation during infiltration of the fibers. In this work, capillary pressure of jute/vinylester composites was measured and the impact of capillary forces on fabric permeability was analyzed. It was found that the capillary pressure was significantly higher in vegetal than in synthetic fiber fabrics. In addition, the permeability of the fibers was characterized using various fluids. The resulting permeability was influenced by the nature of fluid and its polar property. Finally, the capillary pressure measured by this work was used to correct the experimental permeability in order to obtain a property independent of the test fluid. POLYM. COMPOS., 2012. © 2012 Society of Plastics Engineers

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolymer CompositesSame topicEpoxy Resin Curing ProcessesFrench-language works237,207