MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2916814769 · doi:10.3390/ma12050697

Development and Testing of Advanced Cork Composite Sandwiches for Energy-Absorbing Structures

2019· article· en· W2916814769 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Paweł Kaczyński, Mariusz Ptak, Fábio A. O. Fernandes, Leszek Chybowski, Johannes Wilhelm, Ricardo J. Alves de Sousa

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCellular and Composite Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIndependent Electricity System OperatorNarodowe Centrum Badań i RozwojuMinisterstwo Edukacji i NaukiFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaUniwersytet Szczeciński
KeywordsCorkComposite numberComposite materialMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cork is a sustainable material with remarkable properties. In addition to its main application as wine stoppers, it has also been employed as a sound and thermal insulator in facades, building roofs, aeronautical applications, and, more recently, in impact energy absorption systems. In its natural form, cork is mainly used in wine stopper manufacturing, but for other applications, cork compounds are usually employed, which makes it possible to manufacture complex geometries with nearly isotropic behavior. In this work, an attempt was made to merge the desirable properties of two different cork materials (agglomerated and expanded black) into cork composite sandwich structures. These structures were tested according to impact conditions typically experienced by energy-absorbing liners used in personal safety devices. Additionally, the performance dependency on the working temperature was analyzed. The sole black, expanded cork (EC159) and agglomerated cork (AC199A and AC216) were tested in 500 J impacts. It was found that black cork was characterized by superior thermal stability, while expanded cork allowed absorbing high energies. In the second stage, the composites consisting of both tested materials were tested in 100 J impact scenarios. The combination of two materials of different properties enabled reduction of the peak force exerted on a helmet user's head during the impact by about 10% compared to agglomerated specimens. Additionally, it was proved that there was no influence of the glue used to join different cork types.

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)0.001
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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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 head0.192
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations51
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicCellular and Composite StructuresFrench-language works237,207