MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017293671 · doi:10.1002/pen.10840

Membrane inflation of polymeric materials: Experiments and finite element simulations

2001· article· en· W2017293671 on OpenAlexaff
Yong Li, J.A. Nemes, A. Derdouri

Bibliographic record

VenuePolymer Engineering and Science · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElasticity and Material Modeling
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceBubbleInflation (cosmology)ThermalFinite element methodCartesian coordinate systemMechanicsTemperature gradientComposite materialThermodynamicsMathematicsGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A high‐speed optical measurement system, which is capable of measuring transient surface shape, is used in the polymer membrane inflation experiments. The accurate measurement data, which is an array of points, with known Cartesian coordinates and with respect to a fixed coordinate system, provides a source for further bubble shape analysis. Inflation pressure is correlated with each bubble shape measurement. The measured results reveal the importance of the thermal warpage and temperature gradient in the bubble inflation tests. Potential errors in the material parameter calculation, which are caused by assuming uniform temperature and zero thermal warpage, are pointed out. Consequently, a finite element analysis has been carried out to simulate the membrane inflation with/without thermal warpage and the temperature gradient. The material parameters obtained considering the thermal warpage and temperature gradient yield improved agreement with the experimental data. Although in this paper the measurement data is mainly used for the determination of the material parameters in the bubble inflation tests, they are also a source of validating other computer‐aided simulations as well as in the study of the thermal shrinkage of polymer products.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 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

Citations47
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolymer Engineering and ScienceSame topicElasticity and Material ModelingFrench-language works237,207