Comparative property analysis of fused filament fabrication PLA using fresh and recycled feedstocks
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Manufacturing industries generate much waste, which can be converted into raw materials for other allied industries. Thermoplastic wastes can be recycled in many cases. Recently these recycled plastics have been used to manufacture the input filament necessary for material extrusion additive manufacturing (MEAM). Polylactic acid (PLA) is one of the most common and potentially useful engineering plastics that can be additively manufactured, but the effect of recycling on the effective properties is still not well known. In this study, the mechanical properties of MEAM-processed PLA were compared for virgin and recycled feedstock. The collected data were analyzed using a full-factorial design of experiments method, providing insight into the effects of layer thickness and infill density on the performance of the material before and after recycling. The results showed a notable degradation in properties after recycling, but this effect was moderated by modifying the studied parameters. This work and its conclusions will serve as a screening study to guide future efforts in this area and promote the wider use of recycled materials in additive manufacturing.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it