Electromagnetic Characterization of Conductive Aircraft CFRP Composite for Lightning Strike Protection and EMI Shielding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the electromagnetic characterization of new carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) composite applied in aircraft for tackling the lightning direct effect and enhancing the electromagnetic shielding effectiveness. The CFRP composite design is deliberated for ameliorating the electrical conductivity of composite. With the aid of equivalent medium modeling, the inherent electromagnetic properties of CFRP composite have been investigated. The simulated results illustrate that the lightning strike protection (LSP) capability and the electromagnetic shielding behavior of the newly developed aircraft composite have been improved as compared to the original CFRP composite, and comparable to that with copper mesh as a protective layer on top. In addition to simulation, an artificial lightning experiment has been carried out in accordance with SAE ARP5416 by mimicking the natural lightning strike attachment and also the measurement of the shielding effectiveness of the proposed CFRP composite has been conducted by using electromagnetic waveguide transmission line method. The experiment data has validated the simulation results and demonstrated the feasibility of the proposed CFRP composite design.
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) | 0.001 | 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".