First Ply Failure of Laminated Composite Plates - A Mixed Finite Element Approach
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
First-ply failure (FPF) analyses of composite laminated plates have been presented in this paper. A 3-D layer-wise mixed finite element model developed by the authors (Ramtekkar, G.S., Desai, Y.M. and Shah, A.H. (2002). Mixed Finite Element Model for Thick Composite Laminated Plates, Mechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures, 9(2): 133-156.) has been employed for the computation of components of stress and strain. FPF has been predicted by using the maximum stress, the maximum strain, Tsai-Hill, Tsai-Wu and Hoffman failure theories. It has been observed that the 3-D failure theories have yielded approximately the same failure load as their 2-D counterparts because the failure of a lamina (ply) under flexure is primarily associated with the in-plane stress state. It has been demonstrated that the present methodology predicts the FPF load for cross-ply laminated plates very well. Results have been presented for cross-ply-angle-ply, symmetric-anti-symmetric and thin-thick plates to show important observations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it