MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A macroscale damage model for the tensile and bending failure of C/C-SiC structural laminates

2024· article· en· W4399239058 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Edoardo Novembre, A. Airoldi, Marco Riva, Antonio Maria Caporale, Lorenzo Cavalli, Mario De Stefano Fumo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the European Ceramic Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgenzia Spaziale ItalianaCMC Microsystems
KeywordsMaterials scienceUltimate tensile strengthComposite materialBrittlenessBendingFinite element methodPhase (matter)Structural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work presents a Finite Element approach to model the in-plane mechanical behavior of C/C-SiC fabrics at the lamina level, including the non-linear response of diverse lay-ups and the bending-to-tensile strength ratio at failure. The material model employs a decomposition into two idealized phases, which can be exploited to capture matrix- and fiber-dominated responses at an high level of abstraction. The constitutive law of the matrix phase adopts a Continuum Damage approach driven by two Tsai-Wu surfaces, while a quasi-brittle behavior is attributed to the fibers phase. This decomposition effectively represents the influence of matrix degradation on the response and failure of the laminates. Moreover, simulations reveal that a statistical distribution of the strength is required to represent some of the experimental outcomes. The correlation with experimental data that was achieved points out that the technique is a promising tool for supporting the early design phase of CMC structures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the European Ceramic SocietySame topicMechanical Behavior of CompositesFrench-language works237,207