MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319840993 · doi:10.1002/pc.27230

Effect of platelet length and stochastic morphology on flexural behavior of prepreg platelet molded composites

2023· article· en· W4319840993 on OpenAlexaff
Siavash Sattar, Benjamin Beltran Laredo, Sergii G. Kravchenko, Oleksandr G. Kravchenko

Bibliographic record

VenuePolymer Composites · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlexural strengthMaterials scienceComposite materialFlexural modulusModulusBendingMolding (decorative)Three point flexural testMorphology (biology)Fiber

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Prepreg platelet molding compound (PPMC) can be used to create structural grade material with a heterogeneous mesoscale morphology. The present work considered various platelet lengths of the prepreg system IM7/8552 to study the effect of platelet length on the flexural behavior of PPMC composite. A progressive failure finite‐element analysis was used to understand competing failure modes in PPMC with the different platelet length. The interlaminar and in‐plane damage mechanisms were employed to describe complex failure modes within the mesostructure of PPMCs. Experimental results of the flexural tests of the PPMC with different platelet length sizes were used to validate the modeling prediction. The experimental and modeling results revealed complex behavior of the flexural mechanical properties (modulus and strength) on the platelet length. The experimental results indicate that PPMC composites processed with a plate length of 12.7 mm have a higher flexural modulus and strength than 25.4 and 6.35 mm. The platelet length effect on the flexural mechanical behavior was attributed to interactions between various damage mechanisms and the stochastic fiber orientation distribution variability in the material.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolymer CompositesSame topicMechanical Behavior of CompositesFrench-language works237,207