A method for determination of equivalent limit load surface of fiber-reinforced nonlinear composites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a method for determining the limit load surface of fiber-reinforced nonlinear composites such as elasto-plastic composite is proposed.Using the stress approach of the homogeneous theory and the linear matching method (LMM), the limit load surface of the fiberreinforced composite is numerically evaluated in the π-plane, and at the same time, two limit analyses determine the approximate Hill's anisotropic yield criterion for the limit load surface of the fiber-reinforced composite.The Hill's yield criterion determined by 2 limit analyses becomes the inscribed ellipse of the limit load surface evaluated numerically in the π-plane, and the limit load surface can be evaluated more accurately by the two tangent lines perpendicular to the minor axis of the inscribed ellipse and the circumscribed circle of the inscribed ellipse.This means that the limit load surface of fiber-reinforced nonlinear composite can be completely determined by only 2 limit analyses.In addition, it is found that the limit load surface is related to the equivalent strength surface of composite, and that it satisfies the Reuss and Voigt bounds.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".