MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200347406 · doi:10.32920/16777552

An Investigation Into Low Velocity Impact Of 3D Printed Thermoplastic Plates

2021· preprint· en· W4200347406 on OpenAlexaff
Guneet Kaur Mankoo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceIzod impact strength testComposite materialImpact energyPolylactic acidEnhanced Data Rates for GSM Evolution3d printedLayer (electronics)PendulumBrittlenessStiffnessUltimate tensile strengthPolymerMechanical engineeringEngineeringBiomedical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PolyLactic Acid (PLA) is the most widely used material for 3D printing, especially in industrial applications. PLA is an environment-friendly material as it is biodegradable and has high stiffness and low cost. But PLA shows brittle nature when subjected to out-of-plane loading, i.e. impact. Hence, in this paper, a pendulum impact test apparatus was used to perform impact tests and understand the impact damage characteristics of 3D printed PLA coupons. A high-speed and an infra-red camera were used to investigate the impact damage characteristics of the coupons and understand the failure mechanisms. 24 coupons were printed on a Prusa i3 MK2S 3D printer with a 0° raster angle and different layer thickness. The layer thickness was varied from 0.10 mm to 0.18 mm and the coupons were impacted with 3 J impact energy at two different impact locations, which were, at the center and near the upper clamped edge. For impact at the center of the specimen, the absorbed energy first increased and then decreased and the coupons with higher absorbed energy showed more damage. The absorbed energy was always higher for the coupons impacted at the second location, i.e. near the clamped edge with an only exception in the case of 0.16 mm layer thickness. Coupons with 0.16 mm layer thickness had the highest absorbed energy percentage for the impact to the plate center, however for the impact near the clamped edge, 0.12 mm layer thickness had the highest absorbed energy percentage. Specimens with cracks in the direction perpendicular to the orientation absorb more energy than the specimens with cracks in the direction of extrudates. And specimens with only horizontal or vertical cracks absorb less energy than the coupons with cracks in multiple directions.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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