MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ACM/Hindered Phenol Hybrids: A High Damping Material with Constrained-Layer Structure for Dynamic Mechanical Analysis and Simulation

2016· article· en· W2336131286 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cong Li, Xiaoxia Cai, Chifei Wu, Guozhang Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Research Updates in Polymer Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer Nanocomposites and Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceBeam (structure)Damping ratioLoss factorComposite materialDynamic mechanical analysisNatural rubberVibrationPhenolDamping factorRange (aeronautics)Structural engineeringPolymerAcousticsOrganic chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the strong hydrogen bonding interactions, hindered phenol 3,9-bis[1,1-dimethyl-2{β-(3-tert-butyl-4-hydroxy-5- methylphenyl)propionyloxy}ethyl]- 2,4,8,10-tetraoxaspiro[5,5]-undecane (AO-80) demonstrated a remarkable damping effect when it was hybridized with acrylic rubber (ACM). The loss factor of ACM could be largely increased and the position of loss peak could be regulated by controlling the content of the hindered phenol. This kind of high damping hybrids can be used as the laminated layer of sandwich beam for vibration control. Instead of the traditional method ASTM E756-98, a new method based on dynamic mechanical analyzer (DMA) was developed to characterize the damping behaviors of ACM/AO-80 laminated beam. Testing results demonstrated that DMA can reflect the variation of damping behaviors of sandwich beams with various factors effectively, and a theoretical model established here was used to explain the damping behaviors. Based on this model, by means of adjusting the content of AO-80, a high damping ability for the sandwich beam could be obtained at appointed temperature during a wide frequency range.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Research Updates in Polymer ScienceSame topicPolymer Nanocomposites and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207