Influence of ply thickness in laminated composite under quasi-static in-plane compression loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work studies the correlation between the 90° ply thickness in a [0/90n]s carbon-fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) lay-up and the in-plane compressive strength. In the literature, studies have shown that lamina thickness have a significant effect on the mechanical response and damage propensity in the structure. In this study, quasi-static in-plane compression experiments coupled with digital image correlation (DIC) were performed on a carbon-fiber reinforced composite with three different thicknesses of 2, 3, and 4 mm. The thickness increased with an increase in the nth ply of 90° while keeping number of 0 plies constant in all the laminates. A LS-Dyna based finite element model (FEM) was developed using a progressive damage model (MAT_55) to predict the mechanical response of the composite. The results demonstrated that reducing the 90° lamina thickness can influence the mechanism of damage propagation and significantly alter matrix failure. Overall, this study provides insights towards the design and optimization of composite laminate for impact resistance in structural application.
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 | 0.000 | 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".