MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7028017644

Design and fabrication of a piezoelectric micro dispensing printing system

2019· dissertation· en· W7028017644 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanomaterials and Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSinteringPrinted electronicsFabricationInkwellConductive inkSubstrate (aquarium)Incandescent light bulbNozzle
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis presents a detailed discussion on designing the system architecture to control the piezoelectric micro dispensing system from Microdrop Technologies equipped with a 70 µm nozzle diameter MD-K-140 dispenser head via a host computer. The system architecture is designed to control the two main modules of the inkjet printing system. They are, (i) the motor positioning control electronics to control the movement of micro dispenser head to print the structure and (ii) The micro-dispenser control electronics to control the dispensing parameters required to dispense the ink drops. An interactive user interface is designed create a structure, parse it and transmit the command to interact with these modules. The structures were printed on a glass substrate using micro dispensing system from Microdrop Technologies. The printing was done at room temperature. A UTDAgIJ conductive silver nano inks was used for printing structures. The glass substrates were thoroughly cleaned by washing subsequently with DI water, acetone and isopropanol and kept for few hours before printing. Two types of thermal sintering process were used for this work. They were, (i) An oven sintering, and (ii) A 500 W 120 V tungsten halogen lamp sintering. The sintering results were compared using these methods. Oven sintering process was done at different temperatures and time. Incandescent lamp sintering was done varying the distance of the printed structures from the lamp and the time. It was observed that, the conductivity of the printed structure using an incandescent lamp sintering at 1cm from the lamp for 2 minutes yielded almost the same value as obtained using oven sintering at 250 ᵒC for 15 minutes. Maximum conductivity of around 2.64E+05 S/cm was obtained using oven sintering at 250 ºC for 30 min.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.382
Threshold uncertainty score0.741

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.163 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicNanomaterials and Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207