Effects of Viscoelasticity on the Stress Evolution over the Lifetime of Filament-Wound Composite Flywheel Rotors for Energy Storage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-velocity and long-lifetime operating conditions of modern high-speed energy storage flywheel rotors may create the necessary conditions for failure modes not included in current quasi-static failure analyses. In the present study, a computational algorithm based on an accepted analytical model was developed to investigate the viscoelastic behavior of carbon fiber reinforced polymer composite flywheel rotors with an aluminum hub assembled via a press-fit. The Tsai-Wu failure criterion was applied to assess failure. Two simulation cases were developed to explore the effects of viscoelasticity on composite flywheel rotors, i.e., a worst-case operating condition and a case akin to realistic flywheel operations. The simulations indicate that viscoelastic effects are likely to reduce peak stresses in the composite rim over time. However, viscoelasticity also affects stresses in the hub and the hub-rim interface in ways that may cause rotor failure. It was further found that charge-discharge cycles of the flywheel energy storage device may create significant fatigue loading conditions. It was therefore concluded that the design of composite flywheel rotors should include viscoelastic and fatigue analyses to ensure safe operation.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".