Characterization and Modeling of Large Displacement Micro-/Nano-Indentation of Polymeric Solids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large displacement micro-indentation tests have been performed on various polymeric solids to measure the plastic properties. Cylindrical flat-ended indenters with diameter in the range of 10–90 μm are mostly used. The mechanism of large-strain indentation has been examined with optical microscopy and finite element simulations. Results show that under a flat-tipped indenter, the material can quickly reach a fully plastic state. The size (diameter) of the plastic zone is constant in large-strain regions and unaffected by the exact tip profile (flat, spherical, and conical). The indentation stress-displacement curve at large strains is linear as a result of the steady-state plastic flow, from which the mean indentation pressure, a measure of yield strength, can be readily extrapolated. The indentation stress-displacement response is independent of the indenter diameters but strongly dependent on the strain-hardening behavior of the material and the friction between a material and an indenter. Compared with other shaped indenters, the flat-ended indenter requires the least penetration depth in order to probe the plastic properties of a material or structure.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".