MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077871013 · doi:10.1177/0021998302036016241

Probability-Based Modelling of Composites Manufacturing and Its Application to Optimal Process Design

2002· article· en· W2077871013 on OpenAlexaff
Hong Li, Ricardo O. Foschi, Reza Vaziri, G. Fernlund, Anoush Poursartip

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composite Materials · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEpoxy Resin Curing Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersFederal Aviation AdministrationBoeing
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)Process (computing)Finite element methodProbabilistic logicMaterials scienceDeformation (meteorology)Coupling (piping)Channel (broadcasting)Probabilistic analysis of algorithmsWork (physics)Computer scienceStructural engineeringMechanical engineeringComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The control of process-induced deformations in composite structures is important for cost-effective manufacturing. In recent years, significant advances have been made in predicting the average deformation behaviour, but little work has been done in predicting the variability, which results from uncertainties in both the raw material properties and the manufacturing process conditions. A probability-based approach is presented in this paper for predicting the variability of process-induced deformations. A two-dimensional finite element code, which deterministically simulates the various physical phenomena during processing of composite structures, is integrated with a first-order reliability analysis method to calculate the probability of the deformations exceeding a specified allowable tolerance. The methodology is demonstrated through two case studies. In the first study, a probabilistic description of the process-induced spring-in of a channel section is achieved and the effect of variability in material properties on the final channel angle is studied. In the second study, the optimal tool-shape for the channel section is determined by coupling reliability analysis with a simple cost model of the manufacturing process.

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations17
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Composite MaterialsSame topicEpoxy Resin Curing ProcessesFrench-language works237,207