Historical development of geometrical modelling of textiles reinforcements for polymer composites: A review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mechanical behaviour of fibre reinforced polymer composites is geared by the geometrical structure of the textile reinforcements. Consistent permeability, predictable impregnation and even distribution of resin are key factors in reaching targeted mechanical performance, whereas these parameters and others are functions of the geometrical composition. Hence numerous analytical geometrical models have been described in literature covering most of the conventional commonly used weave reinforcements. However, no current model can be broadly generalized to address, for instance, manufacturing deformation of fibres cross-section, periodic variability caused by stitching in 2.5D non-crimp stitched fabrics or arbitrary fibre orientation featuring some recently developed three-dimensional textiles reinforcements. Given that the latter structures can potentially provide more favourable mechanical behaviour in terms of bending stiffness, impact resistance and through-thickness properties, it is worthwhile attempting to adapt the available geometrical modelling concepts so as to address versatile structures. This review aims to trace the physical concepts used for modelling the geometrical structures of textile reinforcements at the mesoscale and compare applicability of various analytical and numerical models to types and geometrical dimensionality of woven textile structures.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 it