Combined puncture/cutting of elastomer membranes by pointed blades: Characterization of mechanisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The simultaneous puncture and cutting behavior of elastomers was investigated by pointed blades. Puncture/cutting tests by three‐pointed blades were performed with different elastomer membranes, including butyl, neoprene, and nitrile rubbers. The fracture mechanisms associated to puncture/cutting were investigated. The quantitative material properties which control the puncture/cutting resistance are obtained. The results have showed that the crack growth propagation is controlled by the material viscoelastic and the fracture behaviors of material, as well as the friction between the pointed blade and material. As evidenced from the fracture mechanism analysis, the friction contributes to the resistance of material against the simultaneous puncture and cutting by a factor of more than 60%. It has also been that the penetration force and the global fracture energy depend on the blade tip angle, the cutting edge angle, and the blade lubrication. Finally, an analysis of mixed‐mode fracture based on puncture/cutting by pointed blades has been described. The crack propagation is a synergistic interaction between the fracture modes I and III. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci.2015,132, 42150.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".