MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955802968 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2019-0065

Evaluation of damage area on fibre epoxy composites using digital image processing

2019· article· en· W2955802968 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
P. Arul Jose, T. Sasikumar, P. Arun Bose, Nagesh Prabhu

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUltimate tensile strengthMaterials scienceEpoxyComposite materialScanning electron microscopeComposite numberIsotropyUniversal testing machineDigital image analysisDigital image correlationTensile testingImage processingDigital imageImage (mathematics)Computer scienceOpticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, fibre epoxy composite specimens are prepared by hand lay-up method with stacking sequences (0 4 /±45 2 ) s . Five specimens are prepared with the same dimensions and named as S1, S2, S3, S4, and S5. These specimens are tested for impact analysis using a drop-weight apparatus (DWA-Ceast9350) at energy levels of 25, 30, and 35 J, followed by tensile testing using a universal testing machine (Dak9103). The damaged areas of the impacted specimens are examined by digital image processing, numerically simulated ABAQUS software, and scanning electron microscopy, followed by tensile strength results. The results of the experiment reveal that when the impact energy increases, the damage area increases, the tensile strength decreases, and the cracks formed during impact are shown in scanning electron microscope imaging. The homogeneity and isotropy of the composite are identified by the Feret ratio and circular shape factor.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.731

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicMechanical Behavior of CompositesFrench-language works237,207