Prediction of Load-Bearing Capacity of Composite Parts with Low-Velocity Impact Damage: Identification of Intra- and Inter-Ply Constitutive Models
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assessments of residual load-carrying capacity are often conducted for composite structural components that have received impact damage. The availability of a verified simulation methodology can provide significant cost savings when such assessments are required. To support the development of a reliable and accurate simulation methodology, this study investigated the predictive capabilities of a stacked solid-shell finite element model of a cylindrical composite component with a damage mechanics-based description of the intra-ply material response and a cohesive contact model used for simulation of the inter-ply behavior. Identification of material properties for the model was conducted through mechanical characterization. Special attention was paid to understanding the influence of non-physical parameters of the intra- and inter-ply material models on predicting compressive failure load of damaged composite cylinders. Calibration of the model conducted using the response surface methodology allowed for identifying rational values of the non-physical parameters. The results of simulations with the identified and calibrated finite element model showed reasonable correlation with experimental data in terms of the predicted failure loads and post-impact and post-failure damage modes. The investigated modeling technique can be recommended for evaluating the residual load-bearing capacity of flat and curved composite parts with impact damage working under the action of compressive loads.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it