PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 18, 2026International Journal of Applied Ceramic Technology0 citationsOpen Access

Damage Progression of C/SiC Composite by Acoustic Emission Analysis With Supervised and Unsupervised Learning Strategies

View Full Paper
MMM.D. MagalhãesYLYang LiKTKamen Tushtev

Key Points

  • The aim is to study the damage progression of C/SiC composites under cyclic loading using acoustic emission data and machine learning.
  • Conducted tensile tests with acoustic emission monitoring on composite samples before and after fatigue testing.
  • Applied supervised learning using the k-nearest neighbor algorithm to classify damage mechanisms.
  • Utilized unsupervised learning with k-means to identify broad damage trends without prior knowledge.
  • Compared the effectiveness of both machine learning approaches in analyzing damage.
  • Supervised learning provided more accurate damage classifications, especially for similar damage types.
  • Unsupervised learning effectively captured overall damage trends but was less precise.
  • Fatigue damage weakened the composite interface, increasing fiber pullout and individual fiber fractures.
  • Tensile strength increased after fatigue loading despite a decrease in elastic modulus.

Abstract

ABSTRACT Acoustic emission (AE) monitoring was combined with supervised and unsupervised machine learning algorithms to investigate the effect of cyclic loading on the residual mechanical behavior and damage progression of a C/SiC composite. Tensile tests with AE monitoring were performed on samples before and after fatigue tests with maximum stresses corresponding to 60% and 90% of the material strength. Two approaches were conducted to analyze and quantify the type of damage: A supervised learning approach based on the k‐Nearest Neighbor algorithm, and an unsupervised learning approach using K‐Means. While the unsupervised approach does not require previous knowledge of the material, the supervised approach has a higher specificity for different mechanisms. A comparison of the two methods highlighted that supervised learning generally results in more accurate classifications, especially for distinguishing similar damage mechanisms like fiber debonding and pullout. The unsupervised approach, though less precise, effectively captures broad damage trends and can be advantageous for initial exploratory analysis. Both analyses indicate that the fatigue damage weakens the composite interface, leading to more fiber pullout and individual fiber fracture. In turn, this results in an increase in tensile strength after the fatigue loading, albeit with a decrease in elastic modulus.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Magalhães et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69e3201440886becb653f31fhttps://doi.org/10.1111/ijac.70186
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. 1Feature analysis and recognition of fiber breakage AE signals after propagation2024 · 1 citations
  2. 2Acoustic emission accuracy from a tensile test of a ceramic matrix composite2024 · 7 citations
  3. 3Fatigue behavior and damage analysis of PIP C/SiC composite2022 · 51 citations
  4. 4Acoustic emission and electrical resistance in SiC-based laminate ceramic composites tested under tensile loading2017 · 88 citations
  5. 5The physics and mechanics of fibre-reinforced brittle matrix composites1994 · 641 citations