MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3182107743 · doi:10.3390/molecules26144164

Extrusion Based 3D Printing of Sustainable Biocomposites from Biocarbon and Poly(trimethylene terephthalate)

2021· article· en· W3182107743 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth Diederichs, Maisyn Picard, Boon Peng Chang, Manjusri Misra, Amar K. Mohanty

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecules · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtrusionMaterials science3D printingPolymer scienceChemical engineeringComposite materialPolymer chemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three-dimensional (3D) printing manufactures intricate computer aided designs without time and resource spent for mold creation. The rapid growth of this industry has led to its extensive use in the automotive, biomedical, and electrical industries. In this work, biobased poly(trimethylene terephthalate) (PTT) blends were combined with pyrolyzed biomass to create sustainable and novel printing materials. The Miscanthus biocarbon (BC), generated from pyrolysis at 650 °C, was combined with an optimized PTT blend at 5 and 10 wt % to generate filaments for extrusion 3D printing. Samples were printed and analyzed according to their thermal, mechanical, and morphological properties. Although there were no significant differences seen in the mechanical properties between the two BC composites, the optimal quantity of BC was 5 wt % based upon dimensional stability, ease of printing, and surface finish. These printable materials show great promise for implementation into customizable, non-structural components in the electrical and automotive industries.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMoleculesSame topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207