MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416381719 · doi:10.1016/j.coco.2025.102650

Large scale fused-granular-fabrication using recycled carbon fibre/PEKK-PEEK pellets derived from aerospace prepreg waste

2025· article· en· W4416381719 on OpenAlexafffund
Ruan-Isabelle Richard Soucy, Adam W. Smith, K. Dupuis, Ilyass Tabiai, Martine Dubé

Bibliographic record

VenueComposites Communications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsAS Composite (Canada)École de Technologie Supérieure
FundersMitacsCentre de Recherche sur les Systèmes Polymères et Composites à Haute Performance
KeywordsPelletsPeekRaw materialUltimate tensile strengthThermoplasticFlexural strengthPolymerDegradation (telecommunications)Inert

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The manufacturing of thermoplastic unidirectional prepreg rolls involves trimming the edges as they do not meet specifications in terms of thickness and fibre content. This production waste, referred to as tape edge trim (TET), is recycled and transformed into pellets to be used as a feedstock for fused-granular-fabrication (FGF). In the transformation of the TET waste into pellets, neat PEEK polymer is added to the CF/PEKK TET to reduce the fibre content and improve the printability of the material. A large scale six-axis FGF printing robot is employed to print boxes from the recycled and virgin pellets. DSC analyses performed on recycled and virgin pellets reveal the degradation of PEEK and PEKK following aging at 380 °C or 400 °C under oxidative conditions, due to crosslinking reactions. However, no degradation is observed for specimens manufactured by FGF. As commonly observed for parts manufactured using extrusion-based techniques, the standard tensile and flexural specimens extracted from the FGF boxes demonstrate anisotropic mechanical properties. Additional boxes are manufactured by FGF using pellets obtained from shredded FGF box fragments to assess the capability of recycling the material a second time. A reduction of the stiffness and strength of the material is shown for this second recycling, which is assumed to be due to polymer chain scission and reduction in fibre length occurring during the shredding of the printed parts.

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 score0.002

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

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