ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Analysis of the Influence of Manufacturing Technology on Selected Static, Fatigue and Morphological Properties of CFRP Composites.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare the mechanical properties of carbon-fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) composites produced using three popular technologies. The tests were performed on composites produced from prepregs in an autoclave, the next variant is composites produced using the infusion method, and the third variant concerns composites produced using the vacuum-assisted hand lay-up method. For each variant, flat plates with dimensions of 1000 mm × 1000 mm were produced while maintaining similar material properties and fabric arrangement configuration. Samples for testing were cut using a plotter in the 0° and 45° directions. Non-destructive tests (NDTs) were carried out using the active thermography method, demonstrating the correctness of the composites, i.e., the absence of structural defects for all variants. Static peel strength tests were carried out for samples with different directional orientations. The tests were carried out at temperatures of +25 °C and +80 °C. At room temperature, similar strengths were demonstrated, which for the 0° orientation were 619 MPa, 599 MPa and 536 MPa for the autoclave, vacuum and infusion variants, respectively. However, at a temperature of +80 °C, only the composite produced in the autoclave maintained the stability of its properties, showing a strength of 668 MPa. Meanwhile, in the case of the composite produced by the infusion method, a decrease in strength at an elevated temperature of 46.5% was demonstrated, while for the composite produced by the hand lay-up method, there was a decrease of 46.2%. For the last two variants, differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) analysis of epoxy resins constituting the composite matrices was carried out, showing a glass transition temperature value of 49.91 °C for the infusion variant and 56.07 °C for the vacuum variant. In the three-point static bending test, the highest strength was also demonstrated for the 0ᵒ orientation, and the bending strength was 1088 MPa for the autoclave variant, 634 MPa for the infusion variant and 547 MPa for the vacuum variant. The fatigue strength tests in tension at 80% of the static strength for the infusion variant showed an average fatigue life of 678.788 × 10
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.