MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793715025 · doi:10.1002/pc.24788

Fiber damage and impregnation during multi‐die vacuum assisted pultrusion of carbon/PEEK hybrid yarns

2018· article· en· W2793715025 on OpenAlexafffund
Félix Lapointe, Louis Laberge Lebel

Bibliographic record

VenuePolymer Composites · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFiber-reinforced polymer composites
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPublic Risk Management Association
KeywordsPultrusionMaterials scienceComposite materialYarnPeekDie (integrated circuit)ThermoplasticFiberFibre-reinforced plasticPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pultruded thermoplastic composites combine great mechanical properties with efficient manufacturing. However, the use of carbon commingled yarns as precursors presents two challenges: the damage induced by the process on the low ultimate strain carbon fibers and the impregnation of the fiber bed by the high‐viscosity matrix. The study outlines four major factors influencing the fiber damage: the carbon yarn tension, types of hybrid yarn used; the usage of a contact preheater and the tapered length of the pultrusion die. The yarn tension is identified as the most important parameter lowering the yarn damage. A tension of 3 N per yarn was adequate to reduce yarn damage. Two techniques are suggested as means to promote impregnation: the usage of multiple subsequent dies and the usage of vacuum. The effects of the die temperature and the pulling speed are also investigated. Void content of 1.3% was reported for the pultrusion of carbon/PEEK commingled yarns. The manufacturing parameters were four dies, vacuum, a speed of 50 mm/min, and a die system temperature of 400°C. POLYM. COMPOS., 40:E1015–E1028, 2019. © 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 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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations36
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolymer CompositesSame topicFiber-reinforced polymer compositesFrench-language works237,207