MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003859802 · doi:10.1088/1361-651x/ab7054

Three-point bending analysis with cohesive surface interaction for improved delamination prediction and application of carbon fibre reinforced plastics composites

2020· article· en· W3003859802 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueModelling and Simulation in Materials Science and Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialDelamination (geology)PerpendicularBendingThree point flexural testUltimate tensile strengthFracture (geology)Geometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Carbon fibre reinforced plastics laminates were loaded through to fracture in a three-point bending configuration, to gain understanding of the cohesive interaction between plies and validate mechanical properties and predictive capability of the FE model. The effect of mesh refinement, scaling techniques, failure models and cohesive surfaces were investigated. Fibre orientations investigated were parallel, 45° and perpendicular to the loading. Experimental results showed a larger radius punch promoted failure on the intended bottom side, tensile stresses region, allowing for the Aramis strain camera to record the failure. When the fibre orientation was perpendicular to the punch load, all failure models show similar rate of force increment with respect to displacement. No difference in failure prediction is observed for the different 0° models, except for a 4.18% under prediction by LaRC02 compared to the experiment. With fibre orientations at 45° and 90°, the Maximum Strain and LaRCO2 failure models were more suitable in terms of accuracy and convergence. Incorporating cohesive surfaces between instances improve nonlinearity prediction of 45° and 90° layups. Small span-to-thickness ratio analysis predicts interlaminar shear failure, delamination, versus large span-to-thickness ratio determine normal stresses to dominate failure in laminate. The model was setup in multi-fibre orientation and cross-ply layups for extended application and was shown to successfully predict material response described in literature.

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.

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 score0.479
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.208 · 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