Compression-compression fatigue of quasi-isotropic laminates: Failure mechanisms and link between dissipative behavior and fatigue life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• The failure mechanisms of a quasi-isotropic laminate under compression-compression cyclic loading are determined. • Linking cyclic dissipation from self-heating measurements, to dissipation in each ply and failure of the laminate. • Rapid determination of the fatigue limit of the laminate from the self-heating curve and a viscoelastic behavior law. • The predictions are consistent with fatigue test results up to 1x108 cycles. Few studies have investigated the fatigue of composite laminates under cyclic compression loading. Moreover, the self-heating approach to rapidly predict fatigue life has rarely been applied to this type of material. The objective of this work is to study the fatigue of a quasi-isotropic laminate under compression-compression loadings and to assess the possibility of rapidly determining an endurance limit from a self-heating test. Compression-compression fatigue and self-heating tests were carried out on a carbon/epoxy quasi-isotropic laminate with a stress ratio of 10. Fatigue tests were conducted for lifetimes up to 10 8 cycles. The damage scenario is investigated by interrupting fatigue tests and conducting subsequent observations of the samples using scanning electron microscopy and X-ray micro-computed tomography. A methodology for analyzing self-heating tests is applied, which allows the determination of the mean volumetric intrinsic cyclic dissipation of the laminate from surface thermal measurements. A method using a viscoelastic constitutive law is proposed to estimate the endurance limit from the self-heating curve.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".