MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3017248397 · doi:10.1177/0021998320903105

Advanced measurement techniques for braided composite structures: A review of current and upcoming trends

2020· review· en· W3017248397 on OpenAlexafffund
Garrett W. Melenka, Cagri Ayranci

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composite Materials · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptical measurement and interference techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaYork University
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBraidMaterials scienceDigital image correlationDeformation (meteorology)Characterization (materials science)Structural health monitoringComputer scienceComposite materialStructural engineeringNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Braiding is an advanced textile manufacturing method that is used to produce two-dimensional and three-dimensional components. Unlike laminated structures, braids have interlaced yarns that form a continuity between layers. This structure allows for improved impact resistance, damage tolerance, and improved through-thickness reinforcement. Despite the numerous advantages of braided composites, braids also have shortcomings. Their highly complex fiber architecture presents challenges in the availability and choice of the strain measuring and characterization techniques. Advanced measurement methods such as optical strain measurement, micro-computed tomography, and in situ strain measurement are required. Optical strain measurement methods such as digital image correlation and high-speed imaging are necessary to accurately measure the complex deformation and failure that braided composites exhibit. X-ray-based micro-computed tomography measurements can provide detailed geometric and morphologic information for braided structures, which is necessary for accurately predicting the mechanical properties of braided structures. Finally, in situ strain measurement methods will provide detailed information on the internal deformation and strain that exists within braided structures. In situ sensors will also allow for in-service health monitoring of braided structures. This paper provides a detailed review of the aforementioned sensing technologies and their relation to the measurement of braided composite structures.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations29
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Composite MaterialsSame topicOptical measurement and interference techniquesFrench-language works237,207