MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765525879 · doi:10.3390/ma10101207

Modeling and Predicting the Stress Relaxation of Composites with Short and Randomly Oriented Fibers

2017· article· en· W2765525879 on OpenAlexafffund
Numaira Obaid, Mark T. Kortschot, Mohini Sain

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsViscoelasticityMaterials scienceStress relaxationComposite materialRelaxation (psychology)FiberStress (linguistics)Finite element methodPolymerStructural engineeringCreep

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The addition of short fibers has been experimentally observed to slow the stress relaxation of viscoelastic polymers, producing a change in the relaxation time constant. Our recent study attributed this effect of fibers on stress relaxation behavior to the interfacial shear stress transfer at the fiber-matrix interface. This model explained the effect of fiber addition on stress relaxation without the need to postulate structural changes at the interface. In our previous study, we developed an analytical model for the effect of fully aligned short fibers, and the model predictions were successfully compared to finite element simulations. However, in most industrial applications of short-fiber composites, fibers are not aligned, and hence it is necessary to examine the time dependence of viscoelastic polymers containing randomly oriented short fibers. In this study, we propose an analytical model to predict the stress relaxation behavior of short-fiber composites where the fibers are randomly oriented. The model predictions were compared to results obtained from Monte Carlo finite element simulations, and good agreement between the two was observed. The analytical model provides an excellent tool to accurately predict the stress relaxation behavior of randomly oriented short-fiber composites.

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)0.000
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 score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations20
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicMechanical Behavior of CompositesFrench-language works237,207