Review of fatigue of bulk structural adhesives and thick adhesive joints
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
Fatigue of structural adhesives has been investigated through joints and a little number of works investigate bulk adhesive behaviour itself. Aerospace and automotive engineering focuses more on joint configuration studies, which are correlated with practical applications. Previous works showed that for thin adhesive joints, material properties measured by bulk adhesive testing and joint testing are similar despite the triaxial stress states developing in the adhesive bondlines. However, with the introduction of structural adhesives in construction industry, thicker bondlines have emerged where the bulk adhesive material dominates the joint behaviour. This review work summarises works on the fatigue of bulk structural adhesives used mainly in the construction industry investigating structural adhesives fatigue behaviour either through experiment on joints or on bulk adhesive specimens. The work focuses on thick adhesive bondlines in joints, and discusses the controversy that is over whether adhesive properties from joints or from bulk material should be used.
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) | 0.001 | 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 it