A Numerical Investigation Into the Natural Frequency Analysis of Delaminated 3D-Printed PLA Beams Including Contact
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>This report includes the results of experimental and numerical modal analyses, performed to determine the flexural fundamental natural frequency of the 3D-printed PLA beam with delamination. Two types of 3D-printed samples, having 0.1mm and 0.5mm delamination thicknesses, are studied. The results of numerical modal analysis are compared and verified against those obtained experimentally. The Finite Element Analysis (FEA), carried out numerically using ABAQUS software, was performed for six cases. For a sample with 0.1mm delamination thickness, two analyses were performed by first excluding and then in the presence of contact/friction in the delamination zone. Another specimen, with a 0.5mm-thick delamination region, was also investigated, where two sets of studies were conducted. The delamination region was first modeled as uniform and was then refined to include the geometric non-uniformity resulting from the 3D-printing process. The latter model exhibits a more realistic representation of the real sample. In each case, two numerical modal analyses were performed, without and with friction contact in the delaminated segment. At the end, a comparison is made between all these models to show the effect of friction, delamination thickness, as well as uniform vs realistic modeling of the delamination, on the bending fundamental frequency of the PLA delaminated beam.</p>
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".