ArticlePolymers2026
Computational Analyses of Stepped-Lap Composite Repairs on a Full-Scale Wing Model.
Article in Polymers, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The use of carbon fiber-reinforced plastic (CFRP) components has increased significantly in civilian aviation, necessitating effective maintenance and repair strategies to ensure durability and performance. While prior studies have focused on composite repair methods, such as stepped scarf patch and bolted joint repairs, these were limited to specimen and panel levels without addressing full-scale wing models. This study bridges that gap by evaluating stepped-lap repairs on a full-scale composite wing model under realistic loading conditions and exploring various repair scenarios. To reduce computational cost, two-dimensional shell elements were employed to simulate repairs, with results validated using experimental tensile test data from stepped-lap repaired specimens. Numerical models were developed for single regions and two closely located repair regions. For single-region repairs, adding up to two extra layers enhanced mechanical strength, but three extra layers increased strain, diminishing performance. For two closely located repairs, additional layers improved strength, though less effectively than single-region repairs. Square-shaped repairs exhibited higher strain due to stress concentrations at the corners, while circular repairs showed more uniform stress and strain distribution. These findings emphasize the importance of optimizing repair geometry and layer configurations using numerical simulations to ensure optimal structural performance of CFRP components.
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.