On the bead design in LFT structures: the influence of manufacturing-induced residual stresses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the design of long fibre reinforced thermoplastic (LFT) structures, there is a direct dependency on the manufacturing. Therefore, it is indispensable to integrate the manufacturing influences into the design process. This not only offers new opportunities for material- and load-adapted designs, but also reduces cost-intensive modifications in later stages. The goal of this contribution is to make the complexity manageable by presenting a method which couples LFT manufacturing and structural simulations in an automated optimization loop. Herein, the influence of linear-elastic, local anisotropic material properties as well as residual stresses resulting from the compression molding of LFT on the stiffness-optimized design of beaded plates is investigated. Based on the simulation studies in this contribution, it can be summarized that the resulting bead height and flank angle, considering anisotropies and residual stresses, are smaller compared to isotropic modelling. As a conclusion, the strength constraint limits the maximum bead height and the flank angle needs to be additionally chosen as a consequence of the local fibre orientations and residual stresses resulting from manufacturing. Optimized bead cross sections are only valid for a specific system under investigation, as they depend on the defined boundary conditions (load case, initial charge geometry and position, fibre orientations, etc.).
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".