Experimental study on compression properties and failure mechanism of 3D MWK carbon/epoxy composites at elevated temperatures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The compressive behavior of the 3D MWK carbon/epoxy composites with two fiber architectures were performed in longitudinal and transverse directions at room and elevated temperatures. Macro‐fracture and SEM micrographs were examined to understand the deformation and failure mechanism of 3D MWK carbon/epoxy composites. The results show that the compression properties and failure patterns vary with the temperature, fiber architecture, and loading mode. The compressive stress–strain curves and properties are different in longitudinal and transverse directions. Meanwhile, the properties increase with the increase of fiber orientation angle and decrease significantly with the increase of temperature, especially after 75°C. Moreover, for longitudinal compression, material A [0°/90°/+45°/‐45°] exhibits shear brittle feature and that the delaminating failure at elevated temperatures, while material B[0°/0°/0°/0°] behaves multiple shear fracture at 45°. For transverse compression, material A shows delaminating fracture along 0°, 90°, +45°, −45° fiber layers and material B is the delaminating between 0° fiber layers. At elevated temperatures, the damage of matrix yielding, cracking, and interface debonding become prominent, the composite becomes more softened and attains plasticity. POLYM. COMPOS., 39:E1987–E1999, 2018. © 2018 Society of Plastics Engineers
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".