MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127349587 · doi:10.1155/2014/253018

Analysis of Free Edge Stresses in Composite Laminates Using Higher Order Theories

2014· article· en· W2127349587 on OpenAlexaff
Hamidreza Yazdani Sarvestani, Ali Naghashpour

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Journal of Materials Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Structure Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComposite laminatesEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionMaterials scienceStructural engineeringTorqueComposite numberMoment (physics)BendingBoundary value problemBending momentComposite materialMathematical analysisMathematicsComputer scienceEngineeringPhysicsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the determination of the interlaminar stresses close to the free edges of general cross-ply composite laminates based on higher order equivalent single-layer theory (HESL). The laminates with finite dimensions were subjected to a bending moment, an axial force, and/or a torque for investigation. Full three-dimensional stresses in the interior and the boundary-layer regions were determined. The computed results were compared with those obtained from Reddy’s layerwise theory. It was found that HESL theory predicts precisely the interlaminar stresses near the free edges of laminates. Besides, high efficiency in terms of computational time is obtainable when HESL theory is used as compared with layerwise theory. Finally, various numerical results were presented for the cross-ply laminates. Also design guidelines were proposed to minimize the edge-effect problems in composite laminates.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndian Journal of Materials ScienceSame topicComposite Structure Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207