Effect of Resin Bleed Out on Compaction Behavior of the Fiber Tow Gap Region during Automated Fiber Placement Manufacturing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Automated fiber placement is a state-of-the-art manufacturing method which allows for precise control over layup design. However, AFP results in irregular morphology due to fiber tow deposition induced features such as tow gaps and overlaps. Factors such as the squeeze flow and resin bleed out, combined with large non-linear deformation, lead to morphological variability. To understand these complex interacting phenomena, a coupled multiphysics finite element framework was developed to simulate the compaction behavior around fiber tow gap regions, which consists of coupled chemo-rheological and flow-compaction analysis. The compaction analysis incorporated a visco-hyperelastic constitutive model with anisotropic tensorial prepreg viscosity, which depends on the resin degree of cure and local fiber orientation and volume fraction. The proposed methodology was validated using the compaction of unidirectional tows and layup with a fiber tow gap. The proposed approach considered the effect of resin bleed out into the gap region, leading to the formation of a resin-rich pocket with a complex non-uniform morphology.
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 | 0.000 | 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".