MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992684688 · doi:10.1098/rspa.2014.0497

Effect of interfacial slippage on the near-tip fields of an interface crack between a soft elastomer and a rigid substrate

2014· article· en· W1992684688 on OpenAlexaff
Tamran H. Lengyel, Rong Long, Peter Schiavone

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElasticity and Material Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlippageMaterials scienceWedge (geometry)Slip (aerodynamics)Hyperelastic materialMechanicsStress fieldCompressibilitySlip line fieldPlane stressFinite element methodStress (linguistics)Composite materialGeometryStructural engineeringPhysicsMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the role of interfacial slippage in the deformation and stress fields near the tip of a plane interface crack occurring between a compressible hyperelastic material and a rigid substrate. Specifically, we draw comparisons between the two limiting cases of ‘no-slip’ (infinitely high friction) and ‘frictionless’ (zero friction) surfaces by performing corresponding asymptotic analyses in the crack-tip region. Our results indicate that for the no-slip case, when the body is subjected to far-field loading, the crack deforms to a wedge-like shape consistent with experimental observations reported in the literature. Moreover, in this case, the wedge angle is shown to be directly related to ratios of various Cauchy stress components on the bonded surface in the near-tip region. Finite-element simulations reveal that the wedge angle also depends on material compressibility and the far-field loading conditions. By contrast, the analysis of the frictionless case reveals that the crack consistently opens into a smooth parabolic shape with a right wedge angle and near-tip stress field dominated by the normal stress at the surface. The results established here can be used as a basis for the understanding of the role of varying degrees of slippage on interfacial cracks.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.493
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations16
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering SciencesSame topicElasticity and Material ModelingFrench-language works237,207