Effects of Nano Organoclay and Wax on the Machining Temperature and Mechanical Properties of Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastics (CFRP)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carbon fiber reinforced plastics (CFRP) are appreciated for their high mechanical properties and lightness. Due to their heterogeneous nature, CFRP machining remains delicate. Damages are caused on the material and early tool wear occurs. The present study aims to evaluate the effects of fillers on CFRP machinability and mechanical behavior. CFRP laminates were fabricated by the vacuum assisted resin transfer molding (VARTM) process, using a modified epoxy resin. Three fillers (organoclay, hydrocarbon wax, and wetting agent) were mixed with the resin prior to the laminate infusion. Milling tests were performed with polycrystalline diamond (PCD) tools, equipped with thermocouples on their teeth. Machinability was then studied through the cutting temperatures and forces. Tensile, flexural, and short-beam tests were carried out on all samples to investigate the effects of fillers on mechanical properties. Fillers, especially wax, allowed us to observe an improvement in machinability. The best improvement was observed with 1% wax and 2% organoclay, which allowed a significant decrease in the cutting forces and the temperatures, and no deteriorations were seen on mechanical properties. These results demonstrate that upgrades to CFRP machining through the addition of nanoclays and wax is a path to explore.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".