Characterization and Simulation of the Interface between a Continuous and Discontinuous Carbon Fiber Reinforced Thermoplastic by Using the Climbing Drum Peel Test Considering Humidity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to investigate the debonding behavior of the interface between continuously and discontinuously fiber reinforced thermoplastics using the climbing drum peel test. The study emphasizes on the importance of considering different climatic boundary conditions on the properties of thermoplastics. Specimens with varying moisture contents, from 0m.% up to above 6m.% are prepared and tested. It is observed that an increase in moisture content from 0m.% to 2m.% results in an increase of the fracture surface energy from 1.07·103J/m2 to 2.40·103J/m2 required to separate the two materials, but a further increase in moisture to 6.35m.% conversely results in a subsequent decrease of the required energy to 1.91·103J/m2. The study presents an explanatory model of increasing plasticization of the polymer due to increased polymer chain mobility, which results in more deformation energy being required to propagate the crack, which is corroborated in SEM investigations of the fracture surface. A further increase in humidity leads to polymer degradation due to hydrolysis, which explains the subsequent reduction of the fracture energy. The experimental set up is modeled numerically for the first time with cohesive surfaces, which could successfully reproduce the effective force-displacement curve in the experiment by varying the interface parameters in the model over an influence length, allowing the conclusion of a process induced variation in the interface properties over a specific consolidation length.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".