Effect of the infill density on the performance of a 3D-printed compliant finger
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
Recent advances in additive manufacturing and soft robotics have enabled the production of compliant fingers and grippers using 3D printing techniques. For instance, the fused deposition modeling (FDM) method allows users to print flexible filaments with pre-specified infill densities. In order to investigate the effect of the infill density on the performance of a 3D-printed compliant finger, this study performs experimental and numerical investigations in order to develop empirical equations for estimating the output force, the output displacement, and the input force corresponding to given values of the input displacement and infill density of the compliant finger. A commercially available thermoplastic elastomer (TPE) filament, Filastic™, manufactured by BotFeeder is used in this study. Prototypes of four compliant fingers with infill densities of 40%, 60%, 80%, and 100% are produced. A two-fingered gripper is also developed and the relationship between the infill density and the maximum payload is investigated. In addition, a finite element model taking into consideration the hyperelasticity of the TPE is developed to analyze the behavior of compliant fingers with different infill densities. The numerical results show good agreement with the experimental data and with the curves for the empirical equations.
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