Integrating 3D Printing into Engineering Technology Curriculum
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
Abstract 3-D printing has witnessed significant improvements since its inception as this process enables economical and rapid prototyping of various product designs within a very short time period. The recent technical advancement in 3-D printing managed to scale down the size of 3-D printers and the complexity of the process, where it is a more affordable technology for hobbyists, educators, engineers, researchers and scientists. The increasing use of 3-D printing technologies in industrial applications such as design and prototyping of products, has started creating demands for a skilled workforce of engineers and technicians who are proficient in all aspects of the additive manufacturing processes, from software-driven 3-D designs to hands-on execution of these designs using modern 3-D printing platforms. In order to be competent, modern engineers will need more advanced skills in CAD and optimization that focus on construction of 3-D structures with a growing number of metal, plastic and gel materials. These recent developments in the 3-D printing sector has also taken the attention of many higher education institutions offering engineering and engineering technology programs. A growing number of institutions have started investing on 3-D printers of various kinds and integrating them into their engineering curriculum and courses in order to assure that their students get familiar with the 3-D printing technologies and get well-prepared to industry. For maximum effectiveness, this integration often requires development of systematic coursework that focuses on the main principles of the technology, so that students are given instruction on the design principles for 3-D printing, proper selection of printing materials as well as proper operation techniques of the 3-D printing machines and corresponding modeling and slicing software tools. The paper describes the teaching experiences gathered along three years at the Department of Engineering Technology at the Miami University focusing on the proper use of 3-D printing technology. We present our efforts in developing hands-on laboratory courses as well as modules using 3-D printing to teach the engineering technology students proper design, creative thinking and analytical problem solving techniques.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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