MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183729660 · doi:10.1108/rpj-12-2020-0317

Escaping Tree-Support (ET-Sup): minimizing contact points for tree-like support structures in additive manufacturing

2021· article· en· W3183729660 on OpenAlexaff
Tsz-Ho Kwok

Bibliographic record

VenueRapid Prototyping Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTree (set theory)Point (geometry)Computer scienceBall (mathematics)Path (computing)ComputationOriginalityEngineering drawingMechanical engineeringEngineeringGeometryMathematicsAlgorithmCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Support structures are often needed in additive manufacturing (AM) to print overhangs. However, they are the extra materials that must be removed afterwards. When the supports have many contacts to the model or are even enclosed inside some concavities, removing them is very challenging and has a risk of damaging the part. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to develop a new type of tree-support, named Escaping Tree-Support (ET-Sup), which tries to build all the supports onto the build plate to minimize the number of contact points. Design/methodology/approach The methodology is to first classify the support points into three categories: clear, obstructed and enclosed. A clear point has nothing between it and the build plate; an obstructed point is not clear, but there exists a path for it to reach the build plate; and an enclosed point has no way to reach the build plate. With this classification, the path for the obstructed points to come clear can be found through linking them to the clear points. All the operations are performed efficiently with the help of a ray representation. Findings The method is tested on different overhang features, including a lattice ball and a mushroom shape with a concave cap. All the supports generated for the examples can find their way to the build plate, which looks like they are escaping from the model. The computation time is around one second for these cases. Originality/value This is the first time truly realizing this “escaping” property in the generation of tree-like support structures. With this ET-Sup, it is expected that the AM industries can reduce the manufacturing lead time and save much labor work in post-processing.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRapid Prototyping JournalSame topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207