MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2615346204 · doi:10.1088/1361-665x/aa73a4

Mechanical characterization of auxetic stainless steel thin sheets with reentrant structure

2017· article· en· W2615346204 on OpenAlexaff
Hüseyin Lekesiz, Sukhwinder K. Bhullar, Ahmet Abdullah Karaca, Martin Byung‐Guk Jun

Bibliographic record

VenueSmart Materials and Structures · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCellular and Composite Structures
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuxeticsMaterials scienceReentrancyCharacterization (materials science)Composite materialNanotechnologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Smart materials in auxetic form present a great potential for various medical applications due to their unique deformation mechanisms along with durable infrastructure. Both analytical and finite element (FE) models are extensively used in literature to characterize mechanical response of auxetic structures but these structures are mostly thick enough to be considered as bulk material and 3D inherently. Auxetic plates in very thin form, a.e. foil, may bring numerous advantages such as very light design and better biodegradability when needed. However, there is a gap in literature on mechanical characterization of auxetic thin plates. In this study, structural analysis of very thin auxetic plates under uniaxial loading is investigated using both FE method and experimental method. 25 μ m thick stainless steel (316L) plates are fabricated with reentrant texture for three different unit cell dimensions and tested under uniaxial loading using universal testing machine. 25 and 50 μ m thick sheets with same cell dimensions were analyzed using implicit transient FE model including strain hardening and failure behaviors. FE results cover all the deformation schemes seen in actual tests and total deformation level matches with test results. Effect of plate thickness and cell geometry on auxetic behavior is discussed in detail using FE results. Finally, based on FE analysis results, an optimum geometry for prolonged auxetic behavior, high flexibility and high durability is suggested for future potential applications.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 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

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSmart Materials and StructuresSame topicCellular and Composite StructuresFrench-language works237,207