MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415927353 · doi:10.15353/hi-am.v1i1.6808

You are what you breathe: observing airborne carbon fiber particulates during FFF printing of PA6-CF filament

2025· article· W4415927353 on OpenAlexaff
Dora Strelkova

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Holistic Innovation in Additive Manufacturing (HI-AM) Conference · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFused filament fabricationFiberProtein filamentSlicingFabricationDispersion (optics)Filter (signal processing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Carbon fiber reinforced filaments are increasingly popular in Additive Manufacturing (AM) due to their enhanced mechanical properties compared to traditional materials like PETG, ABS, and Nylon. However, these materials present challenges, including proper drying requirements and potential fiber transfer to the skin during handling. In this study, microscopic examination of fingertips after handling PA6-CF parts revealed significant fiber transfer, raising concerns about airborne fiber dispersal during printing. This research aims to observe the dispersion of fibers from PA6-CF filament using a Bambu Lab X1C desktop Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF) system. A custom apparatus with filter was developed to capture dispersed fibers during printing experiments. The used filters were then observed for fiber content to draw conclusions. Safety precautions are recommended along with a proposed alternative slicing method to minimize fiber transfer from final parts. This study contributes to a safer working environment for 3D printing enthusiasts and professionals by addressing potential health risks associated with airborne fiber dispersion.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Holistic Innovation in Additive Manufacturing (HI-AM) ConferenceSame topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207