MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132209623

Mode I fracture specimens exhibiting oscillatory crack migration

2018· article· en· W7132209623 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
D. Mollenhauer, S. Baril-Gosselin, E. Iarve, C. (Chengbin) Li, D. Rapking, E. Zhou, M. Braginsky

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNumerical methods in engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCohesive zone modelFracture (geology)Transverse planeCrackingBridging (networking)Delamination (geology)Fracture toughnessFracture mechanics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Damage propagation in [90/010/90]s double cantilever beam specimens, previously studied experimentally, was shown to exhibit an oscillating fracture pattern throughout the central two 90° plies. Interface delamination between 0° and 90° plies periodically migrated through the 90° plies in an oscillating manner. The experimental study showed significant toughening of the [90/010/90]s specimens when compared with a standard 0° DCB of the same material. The [90/010/90]s specimens were modeled in the present work. Damage was modeled using a Regularized eXtended-Finite Element Method to represent transverse matrix cracking and a standard interface cohesive zone method to represent interface delamination. A series of plane-strain and 3D models were produced to examine the effects of varying interfacial/ply strength and fracture toughness. 2D models qualitatively reproduced the oscillating migrating crack pattern, generally with a larger period of oscillation and lower fracture toughness. The 3D models illustrated that the oscillating migration is not responsible for the majority of toughening. Rather, it is concluded that the primary mechanism for increased toughness is a 3D, fiber bridging phenomenon as described in the experimental effort.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicNumerical methods in engineeringFrench-language works237,207