MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229000048 · doi:10.1177/00219983221096888

Experimental and numerical investigation of damage evolution in carbon fiber reinforced polymer stiffened panel in post-buckling regime

2022· article· en· W4229000048 on OpenAlexafffund
Nidhal Bouslama, A. Maslouhi, Patrice Masson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composite Materials · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBucklingMaterials scienceStructural engineeringFinite element methodStiffnessDeflection (physics)Composite materialExperimental dataCarbon fiber reinforced polymerComposite numberEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stiffened composite panels have been extensively used thanks to their ability to withstand high load and large deflection. However, their nonlinear behavior and complex damage modes during the post-buckling regime remain challenging and still require research work to improve understanding. In the current study, the buckling and post-buckling responses of a hat-stiffened panel made with carbon fiber reinforced polymer composite material are investigated experimentally and numerically with identifying the damage process and its effect on the panel stiffness. The experimental analysis is achieved by performing quasi-static multi-step compressive loading up to failure with full displacement assessment. A Structural Health Monitoring strategy is also deployed for registering and localizing the Acoustic Emission (AE) activities during each run. Matrix data extracted from the AE waveforms are processed and classified with respect to damage mechanism. Additionally, this research proposes predictive Finite Element Model based on Progressive Failure Analysis. Modified Chang-Chang failure criteria is adopted and implemented using Ansys Usermat subroutine. Numerical and experimental data have been compared and good agreement is demonstrated.

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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.599

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Composite MaterialsSame topicMechanical Behavior of CompositesFrench-language works237,207