MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2932733808 · doi:10.1177/0021998319831757

Process modelling of discontinuous long fibre carbon/polyether ether ketone composites: Defect prediction

2019· article· en· W2932733808 on OpenAlexafffund
Benoit Landry, Pascal Hubert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composite Materials · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de Moncton
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPratt and Whitney Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialPolyether ether ketoneModulusPeekThermalEtherShrinkageCompression (physics)Thermal expansionPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A numerical model was developed to predict the defect formation during processing of compression moulded discontinuous long fibre carbon/polyether ether ketone composites. The model inputs are the material's temperature-dependant properties (through-thickness modulus and thermal shrinkage), the temperature distribution of the part during cooling and the applied moulding pressure. The material properties of carbon/polyether ether ketone prepreg were measured during cooling from melt using thermal analyses. The model was employed to identify regions on manufactured panels where pressure could be lost during cooling, which are prone to defect formation. Validation was performed by comparing the predicted defect areas against those found on flat panels moulded at pressures ranging from 10 to 110 bar. The model was then employed in a case study to show the importance of the cooling strategy in order to prevent defects on complex-shape components.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Composite MaterialsSame topicMechanical Behavior of CompositesFrench-language works237,207