MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063626370 · doi:10.1115/imece2014-37828

Functional Prototyping and Tooling of FDM Additive Manufactured Parts

2014· article· en· W2063626370 on OpenAlexaff
Farzad Rayegani, Godfrey C. Onwubolu, Attila P. Nagy, Hargurdeep Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 2A: Advanced Manufacturing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsSheridan College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRapid prototypingCADMechanical engineeringComputational fluid dynamicsSoftwareComputer Aided DesignWind tunnelComputer scienceEngineeringEngineering drawingAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present two additive manufacturing applications: (1) vacuum forming tooling using AM; (2) rocket functional prototype using AM for computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and wind-tunnel testing. The first application shows how additive manufacturing (AM) facilitates the manufacture of vacuum formed parts, which allows such parts to be easily produced especially in the manufacturing sector. We show how combining the advantages of the CAD and FDM technology, vacuum forming can be completed quickly, efficiently and cost effectively. The paper shows that using modified build parameters, the tools FDM creates can be inherently porous, which eliminates the time needed for drilling vent holes that are necessary for other vacuum forming tools, while improving part quality with an evenly distributed vacuum draw. Using SolidWorks CAD software, the model of the tool is created. The STL file is exported to the Insight software, and we present how the Tool Paths Custom Group feature is applied to optimize the tool-paths file and then sent to the FDM system that prints the tooling from ABS engineering thermoplastic. The tooling is then used in the Formech 686 manual vacuum forming machine to produce the vacuum formed part. The second application shows how additive manufacturing (AM) has been applied to producing functional model for wind–tunnel testing, as well as providing computational fluid dynamics (CFD) tool for comparing results obtained from the wind-tunnel testing. The present work is focused on applications of FDM technology for manufacturing wind tunnel test models. The CAD model of a rocket was analyzed for its aerodynamic properties and its functional prototype produced using AM for use in wind–tunnel testing so as to verify and tune the aerodynamic properties. Initial wall conditions were defined for the rocket in terms of the air velocity. The flow simulation was carried out and the goals examined are the velocity and pressure fields around the rocket model. The paper examines some practical issues that arise between how the model geometry for CDF process differs from that that of the FDM process. Consequently, we show that AM-based fused deposition modeling (FDM) technology is faster, less expensive and more efficient than traditional manufacturing processes for vacuum forming and for rapid prototyping of function models for wind-tunnel applications.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.185 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 2A: Advanced ManufacturingSame topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207