MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139355605 · doi:10.22215/etd/2016-11507

Experimental Investigation of Mechanical Behaviour of Hybrid Bolted/Bonded Joints for Aircraft

2016· dissertation· en· W3139355605 on OpenAlexaff
Jihyun Kim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptical measurement and interference techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtensometerDigital image correlationStructural engineeringBolted jointJoint (building)Displacement (psychology)EngineeringShear (geology)Mechanical jointMaterials scienceComposite materialFinite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hybrid bolted/bonded joint is an emerging aircraft structural joint configuration that is expected to have two advantages over traditional joint configurations: 1) improved joint strength over the traditional joints and 2) fail-safe design. However, previous studies found no advantages from the bolted/bonded joints mainly due to the adhesive stiffness. Using stiff adhesive resulted in two joints behaving independently. The objective of this thesis is to experimentally investigate the mechanical behaviour of the hybrid bolted/bonded joint with the softer paste adhesive. This thesis verifies the measurement technique, Digital Image Correlation (DIC), which is introduced to the research group for the first time. The DIC technique is verified with the axial extensometer by measuring displacement and strain fields from the simple aluminum test coupon. Additionally, the DIC technique with the instrumented bolt, which is the classic measurement technique to obtain shear load in the bolt, is examined in the bolted/bonded joint configuration. Lastly, the DIC technique is used to investigate the surface strain field changes in different joint configurations. Unique observations are made in each joint configuration, and are presented in this thesis.

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 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 score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.637

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptical measurement and interference techniquesFrench-language works237,207