MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013738418 · doi:10.1177/0021998320913625

High flow compression molding for recycling discontinuous long fiber thermoplastic composites

2020· article· en· W3013738418 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composite Materials · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Material Mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNew Brunswick Innovation FoundationUniversité de Moncton
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialCompression moldingUltimate tensile strengthMolding (decorative)Shearing (physics)PerpendicularMoldWeld lineFlow (mathematics)ModulusAnisotropyTransverse planeCompression (physics)ThermoplasticWeldingStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An investigation into high flow compression molding for recycling thermoplastic discontinuous long fiber composites is presented. High flow recycled panels and conventional low flow baseline panels were produced with a large rectangular (2:1 aspect ratio) mold. Flow was induced in the recycled panels by stacking cut sections of conventionally produced baseline panels in the center of the mold cavity, representing 25% initial coverage. High flow compression molded panels were found to exhibit significantly higher than baseline tensile strength (+50%) and modulus (+31%) when tested in the direction parallel to flow. When tested in the direction perpendicular to flow, the opposite effect was found, with reductions in tensile strength (−42%) and modulus (−37%). However, when the average results of both directions are compared to baseline, no significant difference was found between the recycled and baseline panels. This severe anisotropic redistribution of mechanical properties suggests chip orientation is affected by flow. Additionally, micrographic analysis revealed that high flow molding induces intra-ply chip shearing and a reduction in resin rich regions within panels. Baseline panels also exhibited in-plane anisotropy, despite initial random distribution of chips and no or near no flow induced during molding. In this case, mechanical properties favored the direction perpendicular to that of the recycled panels.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it