MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981042291 · doi:10.3390/nano9101482

Effect of Functionalized Graphene Nanoplatelets on the Delamination-Buckling and Delamination Propagation Resistance of 3D Fiber-Metal Laminates Under Different Loading Rates

2019· article· en· W2981042291 on OpenAlexafffund
Davide De Cicco, Farid Taheri‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬

Bibliographic record

VenueNanomaterials · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialBucklingDelamination (geology)Fibre-reinforced plasticGrapheneComposite numberFiberCompression (physics)Exfoliated graphite nano-plateletsNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an investigation into the effect of graphene nanoplatelets (GNPs) as a means of improving the impact buckling performance and delamination propagation resistance of a recently developed 3D fiber-metal laminate (3D-FML). One of the highlights of the investigation is the examination of the performance of the GNP-reinforced resin at a sub-freezing temperature (-50 °C). 3D-FML beam specimens were subjected to axial impact of various intensities at room-temperature, while they were subjected to quasi-static axial compression load at the sub-freezing temperature. Moreover, the influence of two different surface preparation methods on the performance of the metallic/FRP interfaces of the hybrid system was also investigated in this study. Although the inclusion of the GNPs in the resin resulted in some gain in the buckling capacity of the 3D-FML, nevertheless, the results revealed that the lack of adequate chemical bond between the GNP-reinforced resin and the magnesium skins of the hybrid material system significantly limited the potential influence of the GNPs. Therefore, a cost-effective and practical alternative is presented that results in a significant improvement in the interfacial capacity.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNanomaterialsSame topicMechanical Behavior of CompositesFrench-language works237,207