MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126610716 · doi:10.1177/0021998313490977

Analytical micromechanics equations for elastic and viscoelastic properties of strand-based composites

2013· article· en· W2126610716 on OpenAlexaff
Sardar Malek, Benjamin Tressou, Carole Nadot-Martin, Fernand Ellyin, Reza Vaziri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composite Materials · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Material Mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicromechanicsMaterials scienceOrthotropic materialComposite materialViscoelasticityComposite numberVolume fractionStructural engineeringFinite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using the principles of classical micromechanics, analytical equations are developed in this paper to estimate the effective orthotropic properties of a unit cell of strand-based composites according to their constituent phase properties and their microstructural features such as resin thickness, void content and strand geometrical characteristics. Although a special type of strand-based wood composite product, Parallel Strand Lumber, is considered here as an illustrative example, the methodology can be used for other wood composites consisting of high volume fraction of wood strands. The predictive accuracy of the derived analytical equations is investigated through comparisons with numerical results. Finally, applications of these equations in a linear viscoelastic analysis are discussed. The analytical micromechanics models developed here provide an efficient means of computing effective properties of a unit cell of strand-based composites. These models can then be used within a multi-scale modelling framework that has been developed previously to simulate the macroscopic behaviour of structures made of such materials.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.731

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Composite MaterialsSame topicComposite Material MechanicsFrench-language works237,207