MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995082560

Advanced optimal design concepts for composite material aircraft repair

2003· article· en· W2995082560 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Guillaume Renaud

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKungliga Tekniska Högskolan
KeywordsComposite numberComputer scienceEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The application of an automated optimization approach for bonded composite patch design is investigated. To do so, a finite element computer analysis tool to evaluate patch design quality was developed. This tool examines both the mechanical and the thermal issues of the problem. The optimized shape is obtained with a bi-quadratic B-spline surface that represents the top surface of the patch. Additional design variables corresponding to the ply angles are also used. Furthermore, a multi-objective optimization approach was developed to treat multiple and uncertain loads. This formulation aims at designing according to the most unfavorable mechanical and thermal loads. The problem of finding the optimal patch shape for several situations is addressed. The objective is to minimize a stress component at a specific point in the host structure (plate) while ensuring acceptable stress levels in the adhesive. A parametric study is performed in order to identify the effects of various shape parameters on the quality of the repair and its optimal configuration. The effects of mechanical loads and service temperature are also investigated. Two bonding methods are considered, as they imply different thermal histories. It is shown that the proposed techniques are effective and inexpensive for analyzing and optimizing composite patch repairs. It is also shown that thermal effects should not only be present in the analysis, but that they play a paramount role on the resulting quality of the optimized design. In all cases, the optimized configuration results in a significant reduction of the desired stress level by deflecting the loads away from rather than over the damage zone, as is the case with standard designs. Furthermore, the automated optimization ensures the safety of the patch design for all considered operating conditions.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.260 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207