ArticlePolymers2024
A New Method for Compression Testing of Reinforced Polymers.
Article in Polymers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimized recycling of e-waste and tire rubber into sustainable polyurethane composites with enhanced compressive performance.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Performance Evolution and Formulation Improvement of Resin-Based Anchoring Materials for Hydrochemical Environments.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Compressive testing of specimens taken from relatively thin composite plates is difficult, especially due to the occurrence of buckling. To prevent buckling, the central portion of the specimens used for the compression test has smaller dimensions, and the specimens can be guided along their entire length. For these reasons, optical methods, such as digital image correlation (DIC), cannot be used for the compression test and strain rosettes cannot be glued onto the samples to determine Poisson's ratio. In this study, compression tests of a glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) were conducted using both the ASTM D695 (Boeing version) and a newly proposed method. The new method involves using special specimens that allow T-type rosettes to be bonded to determine Poisson's ratio, whose value of 0.14 was thus determined. SEM images of the failure surfaces were presented and interpreted. A finite element analysis (FEA) of the specimens tested in compression is also presented. The first analyzed case considers the homogeneous and orthotropic composite, loaded with a uniformly distributed force. The normal stress in the central section of the specimen, determined with FEA, has an error of 6.52% compared to that determined experimentally. Additionally, the strain in the center of the strain gauge, determined with FEA, has an error of 4.76% compared to the measured one. In the second case studied with FEA, the sample is loaded with a quasi-concentrated force, which can move in the direction of the symmetry axes of the cross-section, to study the effect of the eccentricity of the compression force on the state of stress. It was shown that the eccentricity of the force has a great influence: the stress distribution in the section of the specimen becomes strongly non-uniform. For a force eccentricity of 0.4 mm in the direction of the OX axis, the minimum stress decreases by 53.7%, and the maximum stress increases by 55.4%. In order to analyze the influence of some manufacturing defects, two other cases were analyzed by FEA, in which it was assumed that the thicknesses of the outer resin layers were modified, making them asymmetrical. For this final FEA, the specimen was considered to be composed of laminates. These results demonstrate the special attention that must be paid to the centric application of force in compression testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.