MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2968036747 · doi:10.1108/rpj-01-2019-0007

Additive manufacturing infill optimization for automotive 3D-printed ABS components

2019· article· en· W2968036747 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRapid Prototyping Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfillAutomotive industryUltimate tensile strengthStructural engineeringAcrylonitrile butadiene styreneMaterials scienceStress (linguistics)Composite materialEngineering drawingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Lightweighting of components in the automotive industry is a prevailing trend influenced by both consumer demand and government regulations. As the viability of additively manufactured designs continues to increase, traditionally manufactured components are continually being replaced with 3D-printed parts. The purpose of this paper is to present experimental results and design considerations for 3D-printed acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) components with non-solid infill sections, addressing a large gap in the literature. Information published in this paper will guide engineers when designing fused deposition modeling (FDM) ABS parts with infill regions. Design/methodology/approach Uniaxial tensile tests and three-point bend tests were performed on 12 different build configurations of 20 samples. FDM with ABS was used as the manufacturing method for the samples. Failure strength and elastic modulus were normalized on print time and specimen mass to quantify variance between configurations. Optimal infill configurations were selected and used in two automotive case study examples. Findings Results obtained from the uniaxial tensile tests and three-point bend tests distinctly showed that component strength is highly influenced by the infill choice selected. Normalized results indicate that solid, double dense and triangular infill, all with eight contour layers, are optimal configurations for component regions experiencing high stress, moderate stress and low stress, respectively. Implementation of the optimal infill configurations in automotive examples yielded equivalent failure strength without normalization and significantly improved failure strength on a print time and mass normalized index. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first paper to experimentally determine and quantify optimal infill configurations for FDM ABS printed parts. Published data in this paper are also of value to engineers requiring quantitative material properties for common infill configurations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.499
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.210 · 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