Experimental investigation on mechanical characterization of 3D printed PLA produced by fused deposition modeling (FDM)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study aims to systematically experimental investigate the influence of infill-patterns (IPs) on specific mechanical responses of parts fabricated by fused deposition modeling (FDM). A poly-lactic-acid (PLA) feedstock filament is utilized in the manufacturing process. Furthermore, six types of infill-patterns (deposition angle), namely full honeycomb, rectilinear, triangular, fast honeycomb, grid, and wiggle, are designed and printed. In order to determine the mechanical properties of manufactured parts, tensile tests are carried out. The mechanical properties such as extension, stress, elongation, energy, and Young’s modulus are considered as objective functions. As a result, there is a direct correlation between mechanical properties and infill patterns. Thus, it is essential to select the best infill-pattern in terms of their applications, giving sufficient strength without overdoing time and cost. Based on the results, a triangular infill-pattern has a maximum value of ultimate tensile strength and E-module (15.4 and 534 MPa, respectively). On the other hand, the wiggle pattern is more flexible.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it