Computational Design and Fabrication of 3D Printed Zippers Connecting 3D Textile Structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Zippers have long been used for connecting and disconnecting two textiles repeatedly and easily. However, many industrial zippers cannot retain their shape after assembly, limiting the potential use of connecting soft textiles to form 3D shapes with large and various curvatures. Thus, we present a method to design and fabricate interlocking 3D printable zippers that can encode post-assembly shapes. The user first gives a target 3D shape divided into developable patches (i.e., curved surfaces unrollable like paper). Then, our design software built on Rhino/Grasshopper computes an interlocking zipper on the boundary curve of the patches. The user 3D prints the zipper in a flat state and welds it to the edge of the textiles by thermal bonding, which can zip into a target 3D shape. In this demo, we report our method and exhibit design examples of 3D printed zippers.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".