PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 31, 2026Journal of Composites Science0 citationsOpen Access

Machine Learning-Assisted Estimation of Interfacial Properties from Acoustic Emission Features During Microdroplet Pull-Out Tests

View Full Paper
PSPyeong-Su ShinKorea Institute of Nuclear SafetyYBYeong-Min BaekKorea Institute of Nuclear SafetySYSeong Baek YangGyeongnam National University of Science and Technology

Key Points

  • This research aims to evaluate fiber-matrix interfacial properties using machine learning techniques based on acoustic emission features.
  • Examined interfacial behavior between glass fiber and epoxy resin via microdroplet pull-out tests.
  • Utilized four acoustic emission features for input into Random Forest models for regression and classification tasks.
  • Focused on estimating interfacial shear strength and identifying failure modes (debonding vs. fracture).
  • Energy and amplitude features showed stronger associations with interfacial shear strength, despite limited overall regression performance.
  • Amplitude alone provided stable discrimination between fiber fracture and interfacial debonding.
  • Combining multiple features yielded marginal additional benefits due to redundancy.

Abstract

Evaluation of fiber–matrix interfacial properties is essential for understanding composite performance and exploring the feasibility of real-time diagnostic approaches. In this study, the interfacial behavior between glass fiber and epoxy resin was examined using acoustic emission (AE) features obtained during microdroplet pull-out tests. Four AE features (amplitude, energy, rise time, and Fast Fourier transform peak frequency) were used as input variables to Random Forest models for both regression and classification tasks, targeting interfacial shear strength estimation and failure mode identification (interfacial debonding vs. fiber fracture). In regression analysis, energy and amplitude showed stronger associations with interfacial shear strength, although overall regression performance remained limited. In classification analysis, amplitude alone provided the most stable discrimination between fiber fracture and interfacial debonding, while combining multiple features offered only a marginal additional benefit due to feature redundancy. These results suggest that intensity-related AE parameters are closely associated with interfacial debonding behavior and failure modes. Overall, this exploratory study indicates that AE-based machine learning can serve as a supplementary tool for indirect and trend-level assessment of fiber–matrix interfacial behavior, with potential relevance to real-time monitoring applications.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Shin et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1bd1db5783ba022b6fd3f6https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs10060294
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Determination of interfacial shear strength in continuous fibre composites by multi-fibre fragmentation: A review2019 · 30 citations
  2. 2Applied Predictive Modeling2013 · 6,819 citations
  3. 3Interfacial properties and water resistance of epoxy and CNT-epoxy adhesives on GFRP composites2017 · 71 citations
  4. 4Scope of machine learning in materials research—A review2023 · 223 citations
  5. 5A review on interfacial bonding behavior between fiber and concrete2025 · 18 citations