Stacking Sequence and Weight Fraction Effect on Tensile and Flexural Properties of Woven Jute and Woven Carbon-Jute Reinforced Polyester Composites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hybrid composites are a category of composites in which more than one types of fiber are used to reinforce the matrix. In this work, the mechanical properties of jute woven & and carbon-jute woven reinforced polymer matrix hybrid composites were evaluated to assess a comparative study between the two configurations varying the stacking sequences. Specimens of composites were prepared by hand layup process. To observe the effect of fiber weight fraction on properties, two types of composites were made having matrix-fiber weight fractions of 85:15 & and 80:20. Moreover, by altering the stacking sequences of the composites, these properties were also examined for the carbon-jute reinforced polymer matrix composites. It was observed that a hybrid jute-carbon composite having a stacking sequence of j/c/j/c/j and weight fraction ratio of 80:20 exhibited a better tensile strength of 108.795(10.885) MPa and Young’s modulus of 6.052(0.489) GPa. Superior flexural strength of 150.41 (±7.501) MPa and flexural modulus of 6.845(±0.825) GPA were found in hybrid jute-carbon composite having stacking sequence of j/c/j/c/j/c/j/c/j that has a weight fraction ratio of 80:20. In both cases, better mechanical properties were found for hybrid composites with higher fiber content and having alternate stacking sequences.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".