Tailoring anisotropy and mechanical performance of additively manufactured PEKK through annealing and architected design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Processing and post-processing parameters critically determine the structural performance of additively manufactured parts. Poly-ether-ketone-ketone (PEKK), a high-performance thermoplastic, offers considerable promise for aerospace applications. However, its mechanical behavior in material extrusion (MEX) remains constrained by pronounced anisotropy and weak interlayer bonding. Addressing these limitations requires understanding how printing architecture and post-processing jointly influence mechanical response. Therefore, the objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of an optimized annealing protocol, established in our previous work (210 °C for 30 min), in reducing anisotropic behavior and enhancing mechanical performance across different raster orientations and architected structures. Tensile and flexural coupons were fabricated at raster angles of 0°, ±45°, and 90° using three infill patterns (line, concentric, and mixed) and tested before and after annealing. Additionally, compressive coupons of Schwarz G and Schwarz P lattices with 40 % relative density were examined to represent structural architected geometries, tested both parallel and perpendicular to the print-layer direction. Results show that reinforcement by annealing is pattern-dependent. At the maximum reinforcement, concentric infill yielded the greatest tensile strength improvement (29.5 %), whereas the 90° raster exhibited the largest flexural strength gain (17.6 %). For structural lattices, compressive strength increased by 37.5 % in Schwarz G, while a reduction of 18.6 % was observed in Schwarz P. While annealing enhanced stiffness, strength, and thermal stability, it also introduced dimensional changes and occasional void-related defects. Overall, this study demonstrates the interplay between anisotropic printing architecture and post-processing, providing pathways to tailor PEKK components for aerospace and structural applications requiring either superior strength (annealed) or enhanced toughness (as-printed).
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".