MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800389653 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2010-0011

ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECTS OF LAMINATE DEPTH AND MATERIAL PROPERTIES ON THE DAMPING ASSOCIATED WITH LAYERED STRUCTURES IN A PRESSURIZED ENVIRONMENT

2010· article· en· W2800389653 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vincent O. S. Olunloyo, O. Damisa, Charles A. Osheku, Ayo A. Oyediran

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Engineering and Vibrations Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDissipationMaterials scienceVibrationSlip (aerodynamics)Structural engineeringMaterial propertiesComposite materialLogarithmAcousticsEngineeringPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In aerodynamic and machine structures, one of the effective ways of dissipating unwanted vibration or noise is to exploit the occurrence of slip at the interface of structural laminates where such members are held together in a pressurised environment. The analysis and experimental investigation of such laminates have established that when subjected to either static or dynamic loading, non-uniformity in interface pressure can have significant effect on both the energy dissipation and the logarithmic damping decrement associated with the mechanism of slip damping. Such behaviour can in fact be effectively exploited to increase the level of damping available in such a mechanism. What has however not been examined is to what extent is the energy dissipation affected by the relative sizes or the material properties of the upper and lower laminates? In this paper the analysis is extended to incorporate such effects. In particular, by invoking operational methods, it is shown that variation in laminate thickness may provide less efficacious means of maximizing energy dissipation than varying the choice of laminate materials but that either of these effects can in fact dwarf those associated with non-uniformity in interface pressure. To achieve this, a special configuration is required for the relative sizes and layering of the laminates. In particular, it is shown that for the case of two laminates, the upper laminate is required to be thinner and harder than the lower one. These results provide a basis for the design of such structures.

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 head0.179
Teacher spread0.171 · 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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicMechanical Engineering and Vibrations ResearchFrench-language works237,207