wrong axis label in published paper
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2023 2:19 pm
Over the years I have wasted a lot of time because careless scientific publications.
In "E. Adolfsson and P. Gudmundson, Matrix crack initiation and progression in composite laminates subjected to bending and extension, International Journal of Solids and Structures, vol. 36, no.21, pp. 3131-3169, 1999", the abscissa label in Fig. 5 (p. 3145) is wrong. It read "Crack density in 90 plies". It should be "Normalized crack density in 90 plies". In addition, I recommend to NEVER use "normalized crack density" because "normalized" means dividing the cracking lamina thickness by the distance between cracks, and that is bad practice, because different laminas have different thicknesses and for most practical cases more than one lamina cracks, so the normalization is different for various laminas. Thus, the values reported are not comparable across laminas. I recommend using "crack density" with units [1/mm] instead!
In "E. Adolfsson and P. Gudmundson, Matrix crack initiation and progression in composite laminates subjected to bending and extension, International Journal of Solids and Structures, vol. 36, no.21, pp. 3131-3169, 1999", the abscissa label in Fig. 5 (p. 3145) is wrong. It read "Crack density in 90 plies". It should be "Normalized crack density in 90 plies". In addition, I recommend to NEVER use "normalized crack density" because "normalized" means dividing the cracking lamina thickness by the distance between cracks, and that is bad practice, because different laminas have different thicknesses and for most practical cases more than one lamina cracks, so the normalization is different for various laminas. Thus, the values reported are not comparable across laminas. I recommend using "crack density" with units [1/mm] instead!