MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403101486 · doi:10.1080/00218464.2024.2408372

An experimental-cohesive zone model approach to predict fatigue life of adhesive joints with varying modes of loading and joint configurations for automotive applications

2024· article· en· W4403101486 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Adhesion · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJoint (building)Automotive industryAdhesiveStructural engineeringCohesive zone modelMaterials scienceEngineeringComposite materialFinite element methodAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predictive fatigue life models of adhesive joints are necessary to enable the assessment of automotive-bonded structures while reducing costly experimental testing. However, contemporary models have typically been calibrated for specific joint configurations and modes of loading, limiting their applicability to large-scale structures. Additionally, available models are based on simulation of cumulative fatigue cycling, making them computationally prohibitive. In the current study, cross-tension (CT) (load angles of 0°, 45°, and 90°) and single-lap shear joint (SLJ) configurations were bonded using an epoxy adhesive (BetaGuard CI6125R; PPG, France) used in automotive production (one part) and tested under fatigue cyclic loading. A total of nine joint configurations, having symmetrical (same material and thickness) and asymmetrical (dissimilar material or unequal thickness) joints, were tested. Fatigue tests at load levels between 25% and 75% of the static peak load were performed until joint failure or to runout (two million load cycles). The static tests of the joints were simulated to failure using finite element (FE) models with the cohesive zone method (CZM). The maximum strain energy release rates (Gmax) were calculated within the adhesive bond line at static loads corresponding to the peak loads of the fatigue tests. The Gmax values, computed from single cycle, specimen-specific FE simulations, were correlated with the measured fatigue life (Nf) of the adhesive joints with varying modes of loading and joint configurations. The fatigue life prediction model, based on Gmax−Nf correlation and following a crack propagation approach, predicted the cycles to failure for 85% of the fatigue tests, and 81% of the independent validation tests. The proposed fatigue life prediction approach provides computational efficiency and large-scale compatibility.

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.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.543
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.239 · 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