MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402245292 · doi:10.1177/26349833241274173

Multiscale modelling and characterization of bonded repaired sandwich composite facing sheet under static loading

2024· article· en· W4402245292 on OpenAlexaff
Niaz Quader, Jacob Muthu

Bibliographic record

VenueComposites and Advanced Materials · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComposite numberCharacterization (materials science)Structural engineeringMaterials scienceComposite materialSandwich-structured compositeEngineeringNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prediction of composite materials failure is a valuable resource for ensuring structural integrity of aerospace structures. For the experimental part of the study, the sandwich specimens were fabricated using two aluminium cores, a Nomex core sandwiched between tool-facing and bag-facing sheets. A damaged slot was introduced and thereafter repaired with filler and repaired plies on the tool-facing sheet. The bonded-repaired sandwich composite facing sheet specimens were tested using a four-point bending setup under static loading conditions. A Multiscale Modelling (MSM) approach was developed to characterize the failure of a bonded-repaired sandwich composite tool-facing sheet. The MSM approach bridged three different length scales such as micro, meso and macro scales. The data processing and information transfer between the scales was facilitated by Visual Basic Applications scripts. Comparisons of micro, meso and micro-scale results were presented for both MSM and experimentation to validate the proposed MSM failure characterization approach. Numerical and fractographical results from MSM and experimentation matched very well for all three scales. In conclusion, the MSM failure characterization approach performed well against the experiment. It presents an opportunity to use an alternative composite materials failure characterization method for future research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.859

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComposites and Advanced MaterialsSame topicMechanical Behavior of CompositesFrench-language works237,207