First Ply Failure of Laminated Composite Plates - A Mixed Finite Element Approach
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".