MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3129824522 · doi:10.1016/j.jmrt.2021.02.030

Computational modeling of constitutive behaviour of 3D printed composite structures

2021· article· en· W3129824522 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Materials Research and Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceTransverse isotropyComposite material3d printedHomogenization (climate)Finite element methodConstitutive equationIsotropyAnisotropyOrthotropic materialElastic modulusComposite numberMaterial propertiesDelamination (geology)ModulusStructural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anisotropy is one of the main limitations in the effective design of 3D printed structures. Further, experimental evaluation of the material behaviour of printed parts is tedious, and expensive. An alternate solution is computational material modeling of printed parts. In the present work, the computational homogenization is applied to estimate the final constitutive behaviour of parts printed with polymeric composite material. To begin, the mesostructure of layers of the printed parts was considered for finite element modeling of the representative volume element (RVE), and to determine their elastic moduli. Computationally estimated material properties were higher than experimental values, and the percent difference between them was higher for parts made of ABS polymer containing short carbon fibers (sCF) versus ABS alone. The computational models provided more insights on the final properties of 3D printed parts for different materials. Further, the stress contours of the RVEs revealed that the printed parts are prone to two different failure types: delamination and fiber pull-out. Also, the lateral and transverse elastic moduli of layers were found to be approximately the same, and therefore the constitutive behaviour of the layers can be treated as transversely isotropic material. In summary, this research work represents an important step towards enabling the effective design and analysis of 3D printed structures using computational methodology.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.273 · 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