Nozzle Shape Guided Filler Orientation in 3D Printed Photo-curable Nanocomposites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Here, we report guided orientation of silver nanowires (AgNWs) in extruded patterns with photo-curable 3D printing technology. A printable conductive composite material composed of polymer matrix and silver nanowires shows significantly varied electrical properties depending on the cross-sectional shape of printing nozzles: flat or circular. The composite is designed to have highly conductive AgNWs and a dielectric polymer matrix like photo-curable methacrylate resin. The dielectric permittivity of photo-curable composite resin with 1.6 vol. % of AgNWs printed through a circular nozzle showed 27. However, the same resin showed much lower permittivity with 20 when it is printed with a flat nozzle. The cross-sectional sample morphology shows that AgNWs printed with a circular nozzle are aligned, and AgNWs printed with a flat nozzle are randomly distributed. A computational simulation of paste extrusion with two different nozzle shapes showed clearly different fluidic velocities at the nozzle exit, which contributes to different fiber orientation in printed samples. A radio frequency identification sensor is fabricated with 3D printed composite using a flat nozzle for the demonstration of AgNW based 3D printed conductor.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".