Development of a generalized analytical model for tubular braided-architecture composites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tubular braided composites are manufactured using a Maypole braiding machine which interlaces yarns in order to manufacture a braided structure. Braids can be produced in Diamond (1/1), Regular (2/2) and Hercules (3/3) patterns. In addition, axial yarns can be included in order to produce triaxial braid structures. Several analytical and finite element analysis models have been developed in order to predict the elastic properties of braided composites. Despite the fact that many models exist for braided composites, a comprehensive model has not been presented that can capture the variety of braiding patterns which can be manufactured using the braiding process. In this study, a new analytical model has been developed that can describe the elastic properties of Diamond, Regular and Hercules braids. The proposed analytical model uses a volume averaging stiffness method in order to account for yarn undulations and the orientation of braid yarns within the braid structure. The model presented here has been compared with the existing FEA and analytical models and has also been validated experimentally. Experimental validation comprised tensile and torsional tests in order to predict the longitudinal and shear moduli for both Diamond and Regular braid geometries. The experimental and proposed model results highlight the effect of braiding pattern and braiding angle on the mechanical properties.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".