MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415684993 · doi:10.3390/machines13110985

Influence of Carbon Fiber Reinforcement on Mechanical and Thermal Behavior of PLA and PAHT in Additive Manufacturing

2025· article· en· W4415684993 on OpenAlexafffund
Mamoun Alshihabi, Mahdi El Said, A. A. A. Alshami, Shafahat Ali, Ibrahim Deiab

Bibliographic record

VenueMachines · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsThermal conductivityReinforcementUltimate tensile strengthBrittlenessThermalIzod impact strength testCarbon fibersFiber

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the comparative evaluation of PLA, carbon fiber-reinforced PLA (PLA-CF), and carbon fiber-reinforced high-temperature polyamide (PAHT-CF) for use in Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) additive manufacturing. These materials were selected to examine how carbon fiber (CF) reinforcement affects PLA and PAHT, using virgin PLA as the baseline. Mechanical and thermal properties were tested to assess the influence of reinforcement on strength, toughness, and heat transfer. Tensile, impact, and thermal conductivity tests were conducted on all three materials. The results showed that PAHT-CF outperformed both PLA and PLA-CF in all categories, achieving an ultimate tensile strength of 57.5 MPa, an impact strength of 14.30 kJ/m2, and thermal conductivity of 0.182 W/m·K. PLA-CF showed moderate improvements in strength over neat PLA but with increased brittleness and slight improvement in thermal conductivity. Notably, this is the first study to investigate the thermal conductivity and resistivity of PAHT-CF in the literature, offering new insights into its heat dissipation capabilities and suitability for high-temperature applications. These findings highlight the critical role of polymer selection and fiber reinforcement in optimizing material performance. The results offer guidance for material selection in additive manufacturing, especially for lightweight, strong, and thermally efficient parts in various 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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.220
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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