A novel 3D mixed finite‐element model for statics of angle‐ply laminates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Analysis of angle‐ply laminates becomes critical and computationally involved because of the presence of extension–shear coupling. A refined three‐dimensional, mixed, 18‐node finite element (FE) model has been developed to analyse angle‐ply laminates under static loading. The minimum potential energy principle has been used for the development of the mixed FE model, where the transverse stress components (τxz, τyz and σz, where z is the thickness direction) have been incorporated as the nodal degrees of freedom, in addition to the three displacement fields. Further, continuity of transverse stress fields through the thickness of the plate and layerwise continuity of displacement fields have been enforced in the formulation. Because all the constitutive and the compatibility conditions have been ensured within the continuum, the present formulation is unique amongst the family of mixed FE models. Results have been obtained for various angle‐ply laminates and compared with analytical and finite‐element solutions, which have been found to be in good agreement with them. Some new results on angle‐ply with clamped–clamped support condition have also been presented to serve as benchmark results. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".