MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389584824 · doi:10.17118/11143/20930

Design optimization and 3D printing of a sandwich panel for a lunar roverframe

2023· article· en· W4389584824 on OpenAlexaff
Olivier Duchesne, David Lessard, Daniel Therriault, Frédérick P. Gosselin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrame (networking)Computer science3D printingAstrobiologyEngineeringMechanical engineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel 2D cellular material optimization method is introduced in this study to optimize the stiffness of a lightweight sandwich panel by changing the cellular configuration of the core. The literature presents computer expensive optimization methods that are not necessarily adapted to the manufacturing method. Here, the stiffness of a sandwich panel is determined by the finite element method and a blackbox optimizer determines an optimal cellular configuration, which are adapted to fused filament fabrication. This optimization method is combined with a parametric study to investigate the influence of core thickness, skins thickness, cellular walls width and cellular density. The optimized sandwich panel and a honeycomb reference are 3D printed and mechanically tested and compared to validate the optimization method. This optimization method is also used on the frame of a lunar rover to decrease its weight and increase its stiffness, thus increasing the frequency of the first mode of the rover in the launcher. Since the lunar rover is a large component, a special 3D printer is required to manufacture it. We developed a custom 3D printer, consisting of a 6 degrees-of-freedom robotic arm mounted by a Typhoon, a high-flow filament based printhead. This high-flow extruder allows to print the frame of a lunar rover within a day, compared to two weeks using a conventional printhead. The printing bed and an enclosure allow to print different materials, from PLA to reinforced PEEK, with dimensions of 1.5m 0.8m. Using this 6 degrees-of-freedom robot, we also developed a non-planar slicer with variable layer height and a control of the nozzle's orientation. This allows to minimize the use of supports, to benefit from the anisotropic behavior of fused filament fabrication, and to smoothen surface roughness. This slicer allows to maximize the contact area between layers and to avoid surface scratching on non-planar trajectories due to geometric incompatibilities between the nozzle and the 3D printed part.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207