Cited by 240Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesInnovations in Concrete and Construction Materials

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 120 of the 123 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Fused Filament Fabrication of PEEK: A Review of Process-Structure-Property Relationships

Open access

Abstract

Poly (ether ether ketone) (PEEK) is a high-performance engineering thermoplastic polymer with potential for use in a variety of metal replacement applications due to its high strength to weight ratio. This combination of properties makes it an ideal material for use in the production of bespoke replacement parts for out-of-earth manufacturing purposes, in particular on the International Space Station (ISS). Additive manufacturing (AM) may be employed for the production of these parts, as it has enabled new fabrication pathways for articles with complex design considerations. However, AM of PEEK via fused filament fabrication (FFF) encounters significant challenges, mostly stemming from the semi crystalline nature of PEEK and its associated high melting temperature. This makes PEEK highly susceptible to changes in processing conditions which leads to a large reported variation in the literature on the final performance of PEEK. This has limited the adaption of FFF printing of PEEK in space applications where quality assurance and reproducibility are paramount. In recent years, several research studies have examined the effect of printing parameters on the performance of the 3D-printed PEEK parts. The aim of the current review is to provide comprehensive information in relation to the process-structure-property relationships in FFF 3D-printing of PEEK to provide a clear baseline to the research community and assesses its potential for space applications, including out-of-earth manufacturing.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/polym12081665

Cites

120 of 120 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 123 references

3 of the 123 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Shahmirzadi, S.R., Yousefi, A.A., and Naderpour, N. (2016, January 2–5). Morphology and rheological properties of copper–polypropylene composite as a candidate for fusion deposition modeling (FDM) filament. Proceedings of the 12th International Seminar on Polymer Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran.
  2. Rechtenwald, T., Eßer, G., Schmidt, M., and Pohle, D. (2005). Comparison between Laser Sintering of PEEK and PA using design of experiment methods. Virtual Modelling and Rapid Manufacturing: Advanced Research in Virtual and Rapid Prototyping, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Advanced Research in Virtual and Rapid Prototyping, Leiria, Portugal, 28 September–1 Octorber 2005, CRC Press.
  3. Daurskikh, A., Sgambati, A., Graça, D., Berg, M., Baptista, A., Angelo, M., and Lafont, U. (2018, January 1–5). Influence of spatial orientation on properties of 3D printed PEEK parts and their design adaptation. Proceedings of the 69th International Astronautical Congress, Bremen, Germany.
  4. Lafont, U., Siarov, S., Egmond, D.A., and van Semprimoschnig, C. (2017, January 17–22). 3D printed PEEK processed by fused filament fabrication: Properties and process relation. Proceedings of the EUROMAT, Thessaloniki, Greece.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–240 of 240

Metadata

Authors
Zanjanijam, A. R., Major, I., Lyons, J. G., Lafont, U., & Devine, D. M.
Affiliations
  • Athlone Institute of Technology (IE)
  • European Space Agency (FR)
Corresponding author
Devine, Declan M.
Venue
Polymers
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2020-07-27
Volume
12
Issue
8
Pages
1665
ISSN
2073-4360 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3044352071
Cited by
240
References
123
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 2
FWCI
2.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Polymers (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Research@THEA (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
European Space Agency (4000126158/18/NL/FE)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Additive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Innovations in Concrete and Construction Materials
Keywords
PEEK, fused deposition modeling, process-structure-property relationships, semicrystalline polymers, printing parameters, polymer 3D printing, space applications, International Space Station, metal substitution

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review