MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303432656 · doi:10.1002/pc.27089

Elevated temperature mechanical behavior of waste short carbon fiber incorporated glass fiber/epoxy composites

2022· article· en· W4303432656 on OpenAlexaff
Srinivasu Dasari, Satyaroop Patnaik, P. Behera, Bankim Chandra Ray, Rajesh Kumar Prusty

Bibliographic record

VenuePolymer Composites · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFiber-reinforced polymer composites
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Institute of Technology Rourkela
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialComposite numberDifferential scanning calorimetryEpoxyUltimate tensile strengthFlexural strengthGlass fiberFiberGlass transitionFractographyPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The fabrication of carbon fiber‐reinforced polymer composites generates vast amounts of waste carbon fiber. In the present work, these waste carbon fibers were added in varying contents (0.1, 0.3, and 0.5 wt%) to glass fiber/epoxy (GE) composite as short carbon fibers (SCFs) to improve its ambient and elevated temperature mechanical performance. The flexural and tensile behavior of the SCF modified GE composites were assessed at 30, 50, 70, and 110°C. The most significant improvement in mechanical performance was achieved by adding only 0.1 wt% of SCF into GE composite across most of the temperatures. At elevated temperatures, all the SCF‐modified GE composites showed superior mechanical performance over the control GE composite. An important correlation between SCF content in GE composite and elevated temperature mechanical performance enhancement has been discussed. Differential scanning calorimetry was performed to understand the effect of SCF addition on GE composite's glass transition behavior. Fractography was conducted to study the various failure mechanisms at ambient and elevated temperatures.

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)0.000
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolymer CompositesSame topicFiber-reinforced polymer compositesFrench-language works237,207