A Study of the Interlaminar Fracture Toughness of Unidirectional Flax/Epoxy Composites
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
Having environmental and economic advantages, flax fibers have been recognized as a potential replacement for glass fibers as reinforcement in epoxy composites for various applications. Its widening applications require employing failure criteria and analysis methods for engineering design, analysis, and optimization of this material. Among different failure modes, delamination is known as one of the earliest ones in laminated composites and needs to be studied in detail. However, the delamination characteristics of unidirectional (UD) flax/epoxy composites in pure Mode I has rarely been addressed, while Mode II and Mixed-mode I/II have never been addressed before. This work studies and evaluates the interlaminar fracture toughness and delamination behavior of UD flax/epoxy composite under Mode I, Mode II, and Mixed-mode I/II loading. The composites were tested following corresponding ASTM standards and fulfilled all the requirements. The interlaminar fracture toughness of the composite were determined and validated based on the specific characteristics of natural fibers. Considering the variation in the composite structure configuration and its effects, the results of interlaminar fracture toughness fit in the range of those reported for similar composites in the literature and provide a basis for the material properties of this composite.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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