MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3131596105 · doi:10.1080/00218464.2021.1887737

Links between surface morphology changes and damage in a toughened epoxy adhesive

2021· article· en· W3131596105 on OpenAlexafffund
Luis F. Trimiño, Duane S. Cronin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Adhesion · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada3M
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialEpoxyAdhesiveStiffnessViscoelasticityUltimate tensile strengthCavitationShear (geology)Fracture mechanicsLayer (electronics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the increased use of toughened epoxy adhesives in current transportation lightweighting efforts, it is critical that damage mechanisms, such as strain whitening, are understood and quantified. Damage quantification is needed for the constitutive models used in structural design; however, thin bond lines in adhesive joints limit direct observation. In this study, microscope observations of bulk toughened epoxy adhesive specimens subjected to tensile loading were linked to damage. Cracks on the surface opened during loading, leading to strain whitening at the crack tips and the initiation and propagation of shear bands. The stresses approximated at the crack tips suggested that particle cavitation could be occurring in these regions. Changes in specimen stiffness were linked to crack growth and the formation of shear bands. Material damage calculated using traditional load-unload stiffness (D ~ 35%) was higher than other methods such as change in material strength (D ~ 18%) and damage from changes in stiffness during load-reload (D ~ 19%). The differences were attributed to short-term viscoelastic effects. A new approach calculated damage from the strain whitening on the free surface (D ~ 21%). Values were in agreement with damage figures from other methods. The technique can quantify damage over the loading history and identify areas of damage localization.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of AdhesionSame topicMechanical Behavior of CompositesFrench-language works237,207