Comparative Performance Evaluation of Carbon & Basalt Fiber Reinforced Copper Composites for Brake Pads in Armoured Fighting Vehicles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Armoured Fighting Vehicles (AFVs) usually require durable brake pads with lesser wear and longevity. However, the currently deployed Copper MMC-based brake pads do not fully complement the requirements for an AFV. With the need for innovation, this research provides various recipes of brake pads with varying quantities of carbon or basalt reinforcement ranging from 0.25 wt% to 1.25%. However, the currently available literature does not provide sufficient evidence for using Basalt Fiber & Carbon fiber and the possible effects within an AFV’s environment. So, the formulations were tested, and compressed into green compact pin samples for experiments after sintering, like Vickers’ hardness test, Pin on Disc Wear Test, SEM analysis, EDX, and XRD analysis for validation. Additionally, modeling and simulation for brake pads and their assembly were done for 1.5 to 5 tonnes of load. This research provides a comparative study between Carbon and Basalt Fibers based copper samples for brake pad applications and high-performance applications like Armoured Fighting Vehicles.
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 | 0.001 | 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".