{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Composites Today","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.compositestoday.com","author_name":"University of Illinois","author_url":"https:\/\/www.compositestoday.com\/author\/university-of-illinois\/","title":"Analysing the pros and cons of two composite manufacturing methods","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"G7UztmuMoc\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.compositestoday.com\/2020\/08\/analysing-the-pros-and-cons-of-two-composite-manufacturing-methods\/\">Analysing the pros and cons of two composite manufacturing methods<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.compositestoday.com\/2020\/08\/analysing-the-pros-and-cons-of-two-composite-manufacturing-methods\/embed\/#?secret=G7UztmuMoc\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"&#8220;Analysing the pros and cons of two composite manufacturing methods&#8221; &#8212; Composites Today\" data-secret=\"G7UztmuMoc\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/* <![CDATA[ *\/\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n\/* ]]> *\/\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.compositestoday.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/img-simulating-failure-composites-today-wing.jpg?fit=1200%2C801&ssl=1","thumbnail_width":1200,"thumbnail_height":801,"description":"Aeroplane wings, wind turbine blades, and other large parts are typically created using bulk polymerisation in composite manufacturing facilities. They are heated and cured in enormous autoclaves and heated moulds as big as the finished part. Frontal polymerisation is a new out-of-autoclave method for composite manufacturing that doesn&#8217;t require a large facility investment. Researchers at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign conducted a study pitting one process against the other to discover the pros and cons of each. &#8220;Frontal polymerisation [&hellip;]"}