ArticlePolymers2024
Radiographic Inspection of Carbon Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Composites (Laminates) with Epoxy and PEEK Binders After Impact and Subsequent Compression Loading.
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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
An approach to detecting discontinuities in carbon fiber-reinforced polymers, caused by impact loading followed by compression testing, was developed. An X-ray sensor-based installation was used, while some algorithms were developed to improve the quality of the obtained low-contrast radiographic images with negligible signal-to-noise ratios. For epoxy/AF (#1) composite subjected to a "high-velocity" steel-ball impact with subsequent compression loading, it was not possible to detect discontinuities since the orientation of the extended zone of interlayer delamination was perpendicular to the irradiation axis. After drop-weight impacts with subsequent compression loading of epoxy/CF (#2) and PEEK/CF (#3) composites, the main cracks were formed in their central parts. This area was reliably detected through the improved radiographic images being more contrasted compared to that for composite #3, for which the damaged area was similar in shape but smaller. The phase variation and congruency methods were employed to highlight low-contrast objects in the radiographic images. The phase variation procedure showed higher efficiency in detecting small objects, while phase congruency is preferable for highlighting large objects. To assess the degree of image improvement, several metrics were implemented. In the analysis of the model images, the most indicative was the PSNR parameter (with a S-N ratio greater than the unit), confirming an increase in image contrast and a decrease in noise level. The NIQE and PIQE parameters enabled the correct assessment of image quality even with the S-N ratio being less than a unit.
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.