Braid-trusion of hollow thermoplastic composites using an expanding mandrel approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Braid-trusion involves the combination of a braiding machine with a pultrusion line to continuously produce composite structures with a constant cross-section and angle-oriented fibres. During the braid-trusion process, braids are subjected to tension and compression, which leads to braid deformation and fibre orientation variations. Successful braid-trusion of tubular structures requires a braid design methodology that accounts for braid deformations during its passage in the pultrusion die. Here, we present a braid design methodology for square hollow pultruded beams reinforced by triaxial braids. It is proposed that the internal perimeter of the braid, constrained by the braiding and pultrusion mandrels, must expand during pultrusion to account for braid consolidation. Two braid designs are proposed. The first has a constant braiding and pultrusion mandrel perimeter. The second has a braiding mandrel perimeter that is 0.9 times that of the pultrusion mandrel, referred to as the expanding mandrel approach. The design demonstrated the effect of an expanding mandrel in reducing fibre waviness by achieving similar braiding yarn lengths. Glass fibre/polyethylene terephthalate composites were pultruded with the constant and expanding mandrels. The constant mandrel braid-trusion failed while the expanding mandrel succeeded.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".