Bio-derived PA11/bamboo charcoal/glass fibre composites for fused filament fabrication, warpage control, strength and flame retardancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adoption of polyamide-11 (PA11) in fused-filament fabrication (FFF) has been limited by warpage, trade-offs between stiffness/strength and toughness at service temperatures, and reliance on non-sustainable flame-retardant packages. To address these challenges, a bio-derived library of PA11 composites was formulated and FFF-printed by compounding bamboo charcoal (BC, 0–5 wt.%) with or without glass fibre (GF, 30 wt.%). Filaments were extruded and specimens were characterised for warpage, wettability, thermo-mechanical response, flammability, and mechanical performance (tensile/flexural/impact/hardness) from 23-90°C. Warpage was suppressed from 3.81 mm in PA11 to ∼0.1 mm with 3 wt.% BC + 30 wt.% GF (∼97% reduction), indicating effective shrinkage control during printing. Mechanical performance was elevated: ultimate tensile strength reached 76.5 MPa in the hybrid, with increased hydrophobicity and improved high-temperature stiffness retention. Horizontal burning rate was lowered by up to 61.9% versus PA11, evidencing char-forming and barrier effects of BC with GF. Architected honeycomb meta-bio-composites were also printed, exhibiting quasi-zero-stiffness force regulation and high specific energy absorption (655 J/kg at 50% compression), highlighting utility for energy dissipators and overload protection. Sustainable, FFF-printable PA11/BC/GF formulations are therefore evidenced to deliver lightweight, durable candidates for automotive, robotic, and protective-sport applications while clarifying processing – structure – property relationships for functional PA11.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".