MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2416216340 · doi:10.3357/amhp.4308.2015

Ultra-Portable Solar-Powered 3D Printers for Onsite Manufacturing of Medical Resources

2015· article· en· W2416216340 on OpenAlexaff
Julielynn Y Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueAerospace Medicine and Human Performance · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Public Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolar poweredHumGloveboxEngineeringAeronauticsEnvironmental scienceSolar energyElectrical engineeringArtMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The first space-based fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printer is powered by solar photovoltaics. This study seeks to demonstrate the feasibility of using solar energy to power a FDM 3D printer to manufacture medical resources at the Mars Desert Research Station and to design an ultra-portable solar-powered 3D printer for off-grid environments. METHODS: Six solar panels in a 3×2 configuration, a voltage regulator/capacitor improvised from a power adapter, and two 12V batteries in series were connected to power a FDM 3D printer. Three designs were printed onsite and evaluated by experts post analogue mission. A solar-powered 3D printer composed of off-the-shelf components was designed to be transported in airline carry-on luggage. RESULTS: During the analogue mission, the solar-powered printer could only be operated for <1 h/d, but was able to fabricate a functional dental tool, scalpel handle, and customized mallet splint over 2 d. Post analogue mission, an ultra-portable plug-and-play solar-powered 3D printer was designed that could print an estimated 16 dental tools or 8 mallet finger splints or 7 scalpel handles on one fully charged 12V 150Wh battery with a 110V AC converter. CONCLUSION: It is feasible to use solar energy to power a 3D printer to manufacture functional and personalized medical resources at a Mars analogue research station. Based on these findings, a solar-powered suitcase 3D printing system containing solar panels, 12V battery with charge controller and AC inverter, and back-up solar charge controller and inverter was designed for transport to and use in off-grid communities.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations34
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAerospace Medicine and Human PerformanceSame topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207