MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412956582 · doi:10.3390/machines13080679

Experiments in 3D Printing Electric Motors

2025· article· en· W4412956582 on OpenAlexaff
Alex Ellery, Abdurr Elaskri, M. Paranthaman, Fabrice Bernier

Bibliographic record

VenueMachines · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaCarleton University
FundersOffice of Energy EfficiencyWind Energy Technologies OfficeBattelleU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsElectric motor3D printingAutomotive engineeringMechanical engineeringComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper catalogues a series of experiments we conducted to explore how to 3D print a DC electric motor. The individual parts of the electric motor were 3D printed but assembled by hand. First, we focused on a rotor with soft magnetic properties, for which we adopted ProtoPastaTM, which is a commercial off-the-shelf PLA filament incorporating iron particles. Second, we focused on the stator permanent magnets, which were 3D printed through binder jetting. Third, we focused on the wire coils, for which we adopted a form of laminated object manufacture of copper wire. The chief challenge was in 3D printing the coils, because the winding density is crucial to the performance of the motor. We have demonstrated that DC electric motors can be 3D printed and assembled into a functional system. Although the performance was poor due to the wiring problem, we showed that the other 3D printing processes were consistent with high performance. Nevertheless, we demonstrated the principle of 3D printing electric motors.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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