Modelling of Mode I delamination using a stress intensity factor enhanced cohesive zone model
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cohesive zone modelling is a common approach to capture delamination in composite laminate structures. Recent experimental advancements now enable the direct measurement of Mode I traction-separation responses (TSRs) from a single specimen using the composite rigid double cantilever beam (cRDCB), overcoming a major obstacle in using cohesive zone modelling to model delamination. However, TSRs measured experimentally with the cRDCB specimen capture damage response as well as the stiffness contribution of the adjacent laminae, which can introduce significant artificial compliance into numerical models when modelling delamination separately from intralaminar behaviour. A two-stage analysis procedure utilizing a crack tip compensation function is presented to enhance the TSRs measured with the cRDCB specimen to accurately model Mode I delamination. The analysis procedure is demonstrated to improve the accuracy of delamination prediction within the statistical variation of published experimental data. Furthermore, the transferability of TSRs measured with cRDCB specimens is explored using available experimental DCB data. It is shown that the onset of damage and early damage behaviours measured with the cRDCB specimen appear to be transferable between geometries, whilst large-scale damage mechanics remain geometry dependent.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it