MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334706545 · doi:10.14288/1.0066334

Minimizing uncertainty in cure modeling for composites manufacturing

2008· article· en· W2334706545 on OpenAlexaff
Donna Dykeman

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEpoxy Resin Curing Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermosetting polymerComputer scienceConsistency (knowledge bases)Reliability (semiconductor)Process (computing)Differential scanning calorimetryMaterials scienceProcess engineeringComposite materialArtificial intelligenceEngineeringThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The degree of cure and temperature are consistent variables used in models to describe the state of material behaviour development for a thermoset during cure. Therefore, the validity of a cure kinetics model is an underlying concern when combining several material models to describe a part forming process, as is the case for process modeling. The goals of this work are to identify sources of uncertainty in the decision-making process from cure measurement by differential scanning calorimeter (DSC) to cure kinetics modeling, and to recommend practices for reducing uncertainty. Variability of cure kinetics model predictions based on DSC measurements are investigated in this work by a study on the carbon-fiber-reinforced-plastic (CFRP) T800H/3900-2, an interlaboratory Round Robin comparison of cure studies on T800H/3900-2, and a literature review of cure models for Hexcel 8552. It is shown that variability between model predictions can be as large as 50% for some process conditions when uncertainty goes unchecked for decisions of instrument quality, material consistency, measurement quality, data reduction and modeling practices. The variability decreases to 10% when all of the above decisions are identical except for the data reduction and modeling practices. In this work, recommendations are offered for the following practices: baseline selection, balancing heats of reaction, comparing data over an extensive temperature range (300 K), choosing appropriate models to describe a wide range of behaviour, testing model reliability, and visualization techniques for cure cycle selection. Specific insight is offered to the data reduction and analysis of thermoplastic-toughened systems which undergo phase separation during cure, as is the case for T800H/3900-2. The evidence of phase separation is a history-dependent Tg-α relationship. In the absence of a concise outline of best practices for cure measurement by DSC and modeling of complex materials, a list of guidelines based on the literature and the studies herein is proposed.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.161 · 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

Citations27
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicEpoxy Resin Curing ProcessesFrench-language works237,207