The real value of CompositesWorld

My kids came home in mid-December for the holidays. I mentioned, one morning, that I had a CW article to finish writing before the end of the day. One of my kids said, tongue in cheek, “Why don’t you have ChatGPT write it?”

ChatGPT, if you are not familiar, is an AI-driven platform that responds to user-entered questions and requests and then generates a narrative response culled from public information and data.

My son, of course, was not serious, but his question got me to wondering: Has AI evolved yet such that the kind of content generated by CW’s editors might be replaced by automation? And, more to the point, should I worry about losing my job to a ChatGPT editor-in-chief?

To find out, I put a few (more than a few, actually) composites-specific queries into ChatGPT. My first was this: Summarize the trends in fiber-reinforced composites manufacturing? The response, which took ChatGPT about 10 seconds to write, was this: 

The fiber-reinforced composites manufacturing industry has seen a trend towards increased automation and use of advanced manufacturing techniques, such as 3D printing and high-pressure resin injection. Additionally, there has been a growing demand for lightweight, high-strength composite materials in various industries, such as aerospace, automotive and wind energy. In addition, the use of sustainable and bio-based materials in composites manufacturing is also becoming more prevalent.

This is a pretty good, if a little generic. But my prompt was generic. So, I decided to try another more specific prompt: What are the challenges associated with recycling of carbon fiber-reinforced composites? Answer:

Recycling carbon fiber-reinforced composites (CFRPs) can be challenging for a few reasons:

1. Separation: CFRPs are often mixed with other materials such as resin or metal, making it difficult to separate the carbon fibers from the other materials.

2. Fiber degradation: The recycling process can cause the carbon fibers to degrade, reducing their strength and making them less useful for reuse.

3. Cost: Recycling CFRPs can be more expensive than simply disposing of the material, which can make it less economically viable.

4. Limited end-of-life options: There are limited options for recycling or repurposing of CFRPs, which can lead to a large amount of waste.

5. Quality of recycled material: Recycled carbon fibers have lower strength, modulus and thermal resistance compared to virgin fibers, which can limit their potential applications.

6. Lack of standardization: There is currently no standard method for recycling CFRPs, making it difficult for manufacturers to recycle the material in an efficient and consistent manner.

Well, that’s really good. I might quibble with #3 — the cost of landfilling waste is very often more expensive than recycling — but it’s certainly on target enough. I wondered, then, how ChatGPT would respond to a prompt that references information that might be more difficult to access. I thought about CW’s tour of Albany Engineered Composites, which had not yet been posted on our site, and came up with this: Describe the composites manufacturing technologies employed at Albany Engineered Composites in Rochester, New Hampshire. The response:

I couldn't find any specific information about the manufacturing technologies currently used by Albany Engineered Composites in Rochester, New Hampshire. Albany Engineered Composites is a company that specializes in the design and manufacture of advanced composite structures for aerospace and industrial applications. They offer a wide range of services, including materials and process development, prototyping and low-to-high-volume production. They are known for their expertise in advanced composite materials, such as carbon fiber and glass fiber-reinforced thermoplastics, and their use of various manufacturing techniques such as autoclave cure, resin transfer molding, vacuum-assisted resin transfer molding and compression molding.

What I found is that ChatGPT, when asked to produce composites manufacturing information that is publicly and readily available, does an admirable job. Responses are generally relatively short and for the most part accurately reflect the state of the technology and industry. But can ChatGPT do what we editors at CW do? Obviously not. There is a level of detail and immediacy conveyed by CW’s reporting that can’t (yet) be replicated by ChatGPT. For example, until we publish the Albany plant tour, ChatGPT can’t write about it. So my job is safe for now. 

In the meantime, you should test ChatGPT yourself. And if you want to have some composites fun, try this prompt: Write a story about a little boy who visits a carbon fiber manufacturing facility.