MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403877673 · doi:10.3390/engproc2024076049

Design and Flow Simulation of Resin Dispensing System for UV Laser-Based Extrusion 3D Printing Technique

2024· article· en· W4403877673 on OpenAlexaff
Chowdhury Sakib-Uz-Zaman, Mohammad Abu Hasan Khondoker

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtrusion3D printingMaterials scienceFlow (mathematics)LaserComputer scienceMechanical engineeringEngineering drawingProcess engineeringComposite materialEngineeringOpticsMechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stereolithography (SLA) is a 3D printing technology that uses a laser to cure liquid resin from a tank, layer by layer, to create highly detailed and precise objects. However, this 3D printing technique requires a large amount of resin material to be placed in the bath that is exposed to UV each time a layer is printed. On the other hand, extrusion 3D printing offers the printing of a part by dispensing only the desired amount of material on demand. However, extrusion 3D printing does not result in the intricate high-resolution features that can be achieved in SLA. To be able to 3D-print high-resolution parts without needing a large resin bath, a dispensing system was designed that would deposit only the required amount of resin on demand while high-resolution capability is achieved by curing the deposited resin using a UV laser. To ensure the isotropic properties of the printed parts, fluid flow simulations of the polymer resin through the designed dispensing system were performed. Therefore, the primary objectives were twofold: (1) designing a resin dispensing system including a specialized nozzle to promote laminar flow and (2) conducting fluent simulations to analyze the nozzle’s performance. The fluent simulations provided valuable insights into the fluid dynamics, affirming the nozzle’s efficiency in ensuring a consistent and controlled laminar flow of the resin during the dispensing process.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207