MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801723173 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2000-0007

BUCKLING OF LAMINATED COMPOSITE PLATE UNDER BIAXIAL LOADING CONDITIONS

2000· article· en· W2801723173 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Suong V. Hoa, Y.S. Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Structure Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBucklingDeflection (physics)Finite element methodBoundary value problemMaterials scienceStructural engineeringStiffnessComposite numberStackingComposite materialMathematicsEngineeringMathematical analysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The buckling behavior of laminated composite plates subjected to biaxial loading conditions was examined using theoretical, numerical and experimental approaches. For experimental work, a special plate specimen was developed. Deflection characteristics using different boundary conditions of the postbuckled plates were also experimentally investigated to obtain admissible analytical deflection functions and boundary conditions for the theoretical and numerical analyses. Non-linear finite element analysis (N-FEA) was carried out for the two types of boundary conditions, i.e., uniform pressure and uniform end-shortening, to approximate the actual boundary conditions of the plate in experiments. Comparing experimental results with the two N-FEA results for the two different boundary conditions, it was found that results using N-FEA with the uniform pressure loading condition agreed better with experimental results. Effects of flexural stiffness ratio, ζ, induced from the stacking sequence variation, were investigated through non-linear finite element analyses. It was found that ζ has an effect on the critical buckling load for high values of It also has an effect on the postbuckling behavior.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.736
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicComposite Structure Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207