MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160411044 · doi:10.1115/imece2014-38109

Development of a Synergistic Damage Mechanics-Based Model for Predicting Multiaxial Effects in Progressive Failure of Composite Structures

2014· article· en· W2160411044 on OpenAlexafffund
John Montesano, Chandra Veer Singh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMicromechanicsComposite laminatesMaterials scienceDamage toleranceDamage mechanicsStructural engineeringDurabilityComposite numberStress (linguistics)Load bearingComputer scienceStructural integrityComposite materialFinite element methodEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A major benefit of advanced fiber-reinforced polymer composites is that they can be tailored and optimized to suit a particular structural application by orienting the reinforcing fibers along multiple directions. For practical load-bearing structural components manufactured from multidirectional laminates, predicting their mechanical behaviour is quite complex. This is specifically the case for progressive failure analysis of these materials when subjected to quasi-static or fatigue loading since local cracks will initiate and evolve in multiple directions simultaneously. The difficulty of the problem increases further when these laminates are subjected to complex multiaxial stress states. This is due to the fact that the multidirectional crack state will be subjected to additional crack driving stress components, which will ultimately alter the crack evolution characteristics. A synergistic damage mechanics (SDM) methodology has recently been developed to address these issues in progressive damage analyses of composite laminates containing multiple damage modes and subjected to uniaxial loading [1]. By combining micromechanics and continuum damage mechanics, the SDM methodology provides a rigorous and practical tool for accurate prediction of progressive damage behaviour in composite structures. This is essential for accurately predicting the integrity and durability of practical structures, which will lead to safer and more efficient designs.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMechanical Behavior of CompositesFrench-language works237,207