Creep Testing of Thermoplastic Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Composite Tubular Coupons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thermoplastic fiber-reinforced polymer composites (TP-FRPC) are gaining popularity in industry owing to characteristics such as fast part fabrication, ductile material properties and high resistance to environmental degradation. However, TP-FRPC are prone to time-dependent deformation effects like creep under sustained loading, which can lead to significant dimensional changes and affect the safe operation of structures. Previous research in this context has focused, mainly, on testing of flat coupons. In this study, a creep testing method for TP-FRPC tubular coupons was developed. Specimens were fabricated using tape winding and subjected to well-defined loading conditions, i.e., pure hoop tensile and pure axial compressive stress. Strain gauges and digital image correlation were both employed for strain measurements and were found to be in good agreement. The evolution of strain rate, Poisson's ratio and creep compliance were investigated. The prediction of experimental data by the Burgers model and the Findley's power law model were explored. The research findings suggest that the developed experimental and analysis approach provides valuable information for the design of material systems and 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".