A low-altitude unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) created using 3D-printed bioplastic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, a four-person student team was given the challenge of designing, analysing, constructing, and testing a low-altitude unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) prototype, which could meet or exceed a set of predefined performance requirements including range, altitude, time of flight, and load-carrying capability. In addition, the team was tasked with having their final design be composed of at least 70% sustainable material by volume. The final prototype took the form of a quadcopter with an airframe 3D printed from a plant-based bioplastic. This prototype was able to meet or exceed three of the four project performance targets, with time of flight being the lone failure. Besides serving as a proof-of-concept prototype of a functioning bioplastic-based UAV, this project is also a demonstration of 3D printing as an enabling technology that can allow even small design teams to realize complex geometries, enjoy enhanced design flexibility, and achieve high levels of UAV functionality with relatively limited resources. Finally, a discussion of important material parameters of 3D printed UAVs is presented.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".