Stress analysis of a carbon fiber-reinforced epoxy plate with a hole undergoing tension: A comparison of finite element analysis, strain gages, and infrared thermography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is the first study, to the authors' knowledge, to simultaneously perform a direct comparison of finite element analysis, strain gage measurements, and infrared thermography for stress analysis under both static and dynamics tensile loads of the classic geometry of a composite plate with a center hole. The plate was made from a carbon fiber-reinforced epoxy composite with dimensions of 250 mm length × 25 mm width × 2.2 mm thickness and a 5 mm diameter center hole. Using static tensile loads of 1000 N, 2000 N, and 3000 N, the plate Von Mises stress field was evaluated using strain gages versus finite element analysis. Using cyclic tensile loads of 1000 N and 1600 N at 5 Hz, the plate Von Mises stress field was assessed using strain gages versus infrared thermography. The strain gages versus finite element analysis line-of-best-fit showed poor agreement (slope = 2.1, R = 0.81), although the slope could easily be applied as a correction factor when comparing the two methods. The strain gages versus infrared thermography showed much better agreement (slope = 0.95, R = 0.91). Finite element analysis displayed a “butterfly” stress field around the hole with peaks of 73.5 MPa (at 1000 N), 147 MPa (at 2000 N), and 220.5 MPa (at 3000 N). Infrared thermography showed a “ring” of high stress around the hole with peaks of 74.8 MPa (at 1000 N) and 102.9 MPa (at 1600 N). All three methods showed similar relative trends for the carbon fiber-reinforced epoxy plate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".