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 accessAbstract
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“PEEK is particularly well-suited for use in extraterrestrial environments, especially Lunar conditions, due to its 3D printability, high glass transition temperature Tg (143 ◦ C), and operating temperature (250 ◦ C).”
From A comprehensive review of lunar-based manufacturing and construction (2024) · cites this paper as [194]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“It also offers high tensile strength (around 100 MPa) and low density ( 1320 kg/m 3 )”
From A comprehensive review of lunar-based manufacturing and construction (2024) · cites this paper as [194]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“meets NASA and ESA's outgassing requirements, high radiation and chemical resistance, and a semi-crystalline structure.”
From A comprehensive review of lunar-based manufacturing and construction (2024) · cites this paper as [194]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“However, printing PEEK can be challenging due to its semicrystalline nature, high melting point, and high melt viscosity.”
From A comprehensive review of lunar-based manufacturing and construction (2024) · cites this paper as [194]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These characteristics make it a potential alternative to metals in some applications and a suitable choice for structural and mechanical applications [194-196].”
From A comprehensive review of lunar-based manufacturing and construction (2024) · cites this paper as [194]
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
Metal Additive Manufacturing: A Review
Frazier, W. E. (2014) · Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance · doi:10.1007/s11665-014-0958-z · Cited by 5,984
A review on stereolithography and its applications in biomedical engineering
Melchels, F. P. W., Feijén, J., & Grijpma, D. W. (2010) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.04.050 · Cited by 2,473
PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants
Kurtz, S. M., & Devine, J. N. (2007) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.07.013 · Cited by 2,391
Additive manufacturing: technology, applications and research needs
Guo, N., & Leu, M. C. (2013) · Frontiers of Mechanical Engineering · doi:10.1007/s11465-013-0248-8 · Cited by 2,188
3D printing with polymers: Challenges among expanding options and opportunities
Stansbury, J. W., & Idacavage, M. J. (2015) · Dental Materials · doi:10.1016/j.dental.2015.09.018 · Cited by 1,758
Recent advances in 3D printing of biomaterials
Chia, H. N., & Wu, B. M. (2015) · Journal of Biological Engineering · doi:10.1186/s13036-015-0001-4 · Cited by 1,734
Applications of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) in oral implantology and prosthodontics
Najeeb, S., Zafar, M. S., Khurshid, Z., & Siddiqui, F. (2015) · Journal of Prosthodontic Research · doi:10.1016/j.jpor.2015.10.001 · Cited by 920
Wu, W., Geng, P., Li, G., Zhao, D., Zhang, H., & Zhao, J. X. (2015) · Materials · doi:10.3390/ma8095271 · Cited by 882
Lasers and materials in selective laser sintering
Kruth, J., Wang, X., Laoui, T., & Froyen, L. (2003) · Assembly Automation · doi:10.1108/01445150310698652 · Cited by 833
Turner, B. N., & Gold, S. A. (2015) · Rapid Prototyping Journal · doi:10.1108/rpj-02-2013-0017 · Cited by 771
Flagged first, then by citations
3 of the 123 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
Kafle, A., Luis, E., Silwal, R., Pan, H. M., Shrestha, P. L., & Bastola, A. K. (2021) · Polymers · doi:10.3390/polym13183101 · Cited by 587
Fused deposition modelling: Current status, methodology, applications and future prospects
Cano-Vicent, A., Tambuwala, M. M., Hassan, S. S., Barh, D., Aljabali, A. A. A., Birkett, M., Arjunan, A., & Serrano‐Aroca, Á. (2021) · Additive manufacturing · doi:10.1016/j.addma.2021.102378 · Cited by 512
Fico, D., Rizzo, D., Casciaro, R., & Corcione, C. E. (2022) · Polymers · doi:10.3390/polym14030465 · Cited by 272
Ceretti, D. V. A., Edeleva, M., Cardon, L., & D’hooge, D. (2023) · Molecules · doi:10.3390/molecules28052344 · Cited by 169
Rinaldi, M., Cecchini, F., Pigliaru, L., Ghidini, T., Lumaca, F., & Nanni, F. M. C. (2020) · Polymers · doi:10.3390/polym13010011 · Cited by 155
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)
- PMC
- PMC7465918
- 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
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- 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
