MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367310762 · doi:10.3390/met13050859

A Review on Extrusion Additive Manufacturing of Pure Copper

2023· review· en· W4367310762 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMetals · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Regina
KeywordsExtrusionCopperRaw materialMaterials scienceNozzleSinteringMetallurgy3D printingElectronicsMechanical engineeringComposite materialProcess engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Copper, due to its high thermal and electrical conductivity, is used extensively in many industries such as electronics, aerospace, etc. In the literature, researchers have utilized different additive manufacturing (AM) techniques to fabricate parts with pure copper; however, each technique comes with unique pros and cons. Among others, material extrusion (MEX) is a noteworthy AM technique that offers huge potential to modify the system to be able to print copper parts without a size restriction. For that purpose, copper is mixed with a binder system, which is heated in a melt chamber and then extruded out of a nozzle to deposit the material on a bed. The printed part, known as the green part, then goes through the de-binding and sintering processes to remove all the binding materials and densify the metal parts, respectively. The properties of the final sintered part depend on the processing and post-processing parameters. In this work, nine published articles are identified that focus on the 3D printing of pure copper parts using the MEX AM technique. Depending on the type of feedstock and the feeding mechanism, the MEX AM techniques for pure copper can be broadly categorized into three types: pellet-fed screw-based printing, filament-fed printing, and direct-ink write-based printing. The basic principles of these printing methods, corresponding process parameters, and the required materials and feedstock are discussed in this paper. Later, the physical, electrical, and mechanical properties of the final parts printed from these methods are discussed. Finally, some prospects and challenges related to the shrinkage of the printed copper part during post-processing are also outlined.

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), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.245 · 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