Combining Digital Image Correlation and Acoustic Emission to Characterize the Flexural Behavior of Flax Biocomposites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the effect of staking sequences and identifying the damage occurring within a structure using a structural health monitoring system are the keys to an efficient design of composite-based parts. In this research, a combination of digital image correlation (DIC) and acoustic emission (AE) is used to locate and classify the type of damage depending on the stacking sequence of the laminate during flexural loading. As a first step, the results of the strain fields for unidirectional, cross-ply, and quasi-isotropic laminates were compared to discuss their global behavior and to correlate the different damage patterns with the possible failure mechanisms. The damage was then addressed using a comprehensive interpretation of the acoustic emission signatures and the K-means classification of the acoustic events. The development of each damage mechanism was correlated to the applied load and expressed as a function of the loading rate to highlight the effect of the stacking sequence. Finally, the results of DIC and AE were combined to improve the reliability of the damage investigation without limiting the failure mechanism to matrix cracking, interfacial failure, and fiber breakage, as expected by the unsupervised event clustering.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".