MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014014476 · doi:10.1177/0021998320912479

Using fractional derivatives for improved viscoelastic modeling of textile composites. Part I: Fabric yarns

2020· article· en· W3014014476 on OpenAlexafffund
R.T. Faal, Reza Sourki, Bryn Crawford, Reza Vaziri, Abbas S. Milani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composite Materials · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Structure Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceViscoelasticityFractional calculusComposite materialRelaxation (psychology)Constitutive equationStress relaxationCreepModulusStress (linguistics)PolypropyleneMathematical analysisStructural engineeringMathematicsFinite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, the viscoelastic behavior of fabric yarns is modeled by a new means of fractional calculus. First, the constitutive relation of the fractional “Poynting-Thomson” model is developed to investigate the behavior of yarns. The proposed material constitutive relation is a differential equation of fractional order, where the response to a unit step of stress (for determination of creep compliance), or a unit step of strain (for stress relaxation modulus) can be readily found in the literature. Here, focusing on the stress relaxation, the response function is fitted to the experimental data of yarns in a typical woven fabric prepreg, at both dry and partially consolidated conditions. The yarns were made of E-glass fibers comingled with polypropylene fibers. The results showed a significant agreement with experimental data along with improved predictions of the new fractional modeling approach when compared to other approaches such as the integer order model and Prony series. For early relaxation times, especially for [Formula: see text] a considerable discrepancy was observed between the values of relaxation modulus obtained by the experiments and that by the integer-order derivative model. However, the results extracted via the fractional derivatives were in close agreement with experimental results at all relaxation times. Using the fractional properties of the yarns, the variation of storage and loss moduli of the yarns with external frequency loading was also predicted, capturing both the rubbery and glassy regions of the material frequency response.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.533
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Composite MaterialsSame topicComposite Structure Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207