MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964205452 · doi:10.5539/cis.v12n3p21

Practical Nozzle Temperature Control Method for Robot FDM Printing System

2019· article· en· W2964205452 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yijian Liu, Ming Chen, Jihong Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer and Information Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNozzleFused deposition modelingTemperature controlComputer scienceParticle swarm optimization3D printingVoltageTemperature measurementRobotMechanical engineeringArtificial intelligenceElectrical engineeringAlgorithmEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) technology in 3D printing has beendeveloped for many years. In this paper, a robot FDM 3D printingsystem is proposed and the nozzle temperature control issue isfocused primarily. The temperature measurement adopts a data driven modeling method andthe parameters of the measurement model are trained by the particle swarm optimization algorithm. A practical temperature control method is presented in which thetemperature control of nozzle is divided into two periods. Duringthe temperature flying period, the heating voltage is givenaccording to the current temperature value and its varying trend. In thefalling time of nozzle temperature, the corresponding controlvoltage value is provided correspondingly. Based on this practical control strategy, a partdesigned with Solidworks software is printed using the robot FDM printing system which validates theeffectiveness of the practical temperature control method.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer and Information ScienceSame topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207