MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053041999 · doi:10.1177/002199830003400401

Dynamic Testing of Composite Laminates with a Tensile Split Hopkinson Bar

2000· article· en· W2053041999 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composite Materials · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicHigh-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceSplit-Hopkinson pressure barComposite materialUltimate tensile strengthEpoxyStrain rateTensile testingBar (unit)Dynamic testingComposite numberComposite laminatesDynamic loadingStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A tensile version of the split Hopkinson bar, suitable for dynamic testing of laminated composite materials, is introduced. A pulse duration of 200-250 microseconds and peak strain rates of up to 350 s5l are obtained. Tests performed on a quasi-isotropic lay-up of graphite-epoxy show good repeatability. To determine the significance of rate-dependency, static tests were also performed using an identical specimen configuration as in the dynamic tests. Comparison of the Hopkinson bar tests to those performed at a quasi-static rate on a hydraulic test machine shows the rate-dependency of this lay-up of graphite-epoxy. Tensile strength and fracture strain are found to be higher for dynamic testing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.254
Teacher spread0.241 · 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