MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404917843 · doi:10.1016/j.jcomc.2024.100547

Comparing flax fibre/biopolymer woven composites with carbon fibre-enhanced, partially green alternatives: Mechanical performance versus sustainability

2024· article· en· W4404917843 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

VenueComposites Part C Open Access · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNatural Fiber Reinforced Composites
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsBiopolymerComposite materialMaterials scienceSustainabilityCarbon fibersComposite numberPolymerEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Natural fibre/biopolymer matrix, known as green/fully sustainable, composites are emerging as alternatives to non-sustainable or partially sustainable composites, while ideally targeting similar material properties. This study first characterizes and compares thermo-mechanical performance of novel green composites made of Flax Fibre (FF) reinforced in thermosetting bioresin options, fabricated via two different manufacturing techniques. Namely, flax fibre-reinforced bioepoxy (Bioepoxy/35%FF) woven biocomposite was fabricated via vacuum infusion, while FF-reinforced (bio)Polyfurfuryl Alcohol (PFA) woven prepreg was consolidated through vacuum bagging (PFA/45%FF) as the second option. Additionally, for design comparisons, Carbon Fibre (CF)-PFA (PFA/60%CF), as well as hybrid FF-CF-based PFA (PFA/45%FF-15%CF) samples were fabricated to understand the performance difference between the green composite options versus the latter partially sustainable or hybrid design alternatives. Results demonstrated that, despite their required different manufacturing techniques, Bioepoxy/35%FF and PFA/60%FF provided very comparable density, tensile strength, and impact properties. Both biocomposites outperformed the CF-added designs under damping property (by 150%) at low frequency and specific energy absorption property (by 37%), thanks to the unique micro-architecture of flax fibre that enhances deformation energy dissipation through inter- and intra-cell walls friction and internal failure mechanisms. However, incorporating 15% of CF into PFA/FF (i.e. hybrid PFA/45%FF-15%CF) increased the tensile strength by 130% and the tensile modulus by 90%, while keeping a similar impact energy absorption as the fully flax-based biocomposite options. The fully CF-based PFA (as a least sustainable option among the tested samples) revealed the highest tensile properties, hardness, and thermal stability, clearly highlighting the necessity for formal trade-off analyses during design.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
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 score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.301 · 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