MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382402763 · doi:10.1115/1.4062842

Multimaterial Topology Optimization of Adhesive Backing Layers via J-Integral and Strain Energy Minimizations

2023· article· en· W4382402763 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Mechanics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTopology Optimization in Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHuman Frontier Science Program
KeywordsTopology optimizationStrain energyStrain (injury)AdhesiveTopology (electrical circuits)Materials scienceEnergy (signal processing)Composite materialStructural engineeringFinite element methodPhysicsMathematicsEngineeringAnatomyLayer (electronics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Strong adhesives often rely on reduced stress concentrations obtained via specific functional grading of material properties. This can be seen in many examples in nature and engineering. Basic design principles have been formulated based on parametric optimization, but a general design tool is still missing. We propose here the use of topology optimization to achieve optimal stiffness distribution in a multimaterial adhesive backing layer, reducing stress concentration at selected (crack tip) locations. The method involves the minimization of a linear combination of (i) the J-integral around the crack tip and (ii) the strain energy of the structure. This combination is due to the compromise between numerical stability and accuracy of the method, where (i) alone is numerically unstable and (ii) alone cannot eliminate the crack tip stress singularity. We analyze three cases in plane strain conditions, namely, (1) double-edged crack and (2) center crack, in tension, as well as (3) edge crack under shear. Each case evidences a different optimal topology with (1) and (2) providing similar results. The optimal topology allocates stiffness in regions that are far away from the crack tip, and the allocation of softer materials over stiffer ones produces a sophisticated structural hierarchy. To test our solutions, we plot the contact stress distribution across the interface. In all observed cases, we eliminate the stress singularity at the crack tip, albeit generating (mild) stress concentrations in other locations. The optimal topologies are tested to be independent of the crack size. Our method ultimately provides the robust design of flaw tolerant adhesives where the crack location is known.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.597

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.199 · 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