MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116094322 · doi:10.82417/z1wf-q341

Magnetic field influence on the mechanical properties of 3D-printed magnetorheological composites

2025· other· en· W7116094322 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueEspace ÉTS (ETS) · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaYork University
KeywordsMagnetorheological fluidMagnetic fieldMagnetorheological elastomerToughnessUltimate tensile strengthMagnetometerMicrostructurePolylactic acidFerromagnetism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magnetorheological (MR) materials, such as ferromagnetic particle-reinforced composites, exhibit tunable mechanical properties under magnetic fields, which are crucial for innovative applications in automotive, aerospace, and medical devices. However, accurately modeling their behavior remains challenging due to the intricate interactions between the magnetic particles and the matrix. This research explores how applying a magnetic field during additive manufacturing, also known as 3D printing, can affect the alignment and distribution of magnetic particles, influencing the material's mechanical properties. Preliminary results show that magnetic fields significantly alter mechanical properties, including toughness and Young’s modulus, suggesting the potential for real-time control during fabrication. Iron-reinforced polylactic acid (PLA) filament is magnetized during the fused filament fabrication (FFF). ASTM D638 Type IV specimens are printed under three conditions: without a magnetic field, above a single samarium cobalt magnet, and between two samarium cobalt magnets. All samples were printed using 0- and 90-degree raster for anisotropic behavior evaluation. The effects of these different orientations on the material’s mechanical properties and microstructure are examined using tensile testing and optical microscopy. The findings provide valuable insights into the influence of magnetic field direction and field strength on MR materials, which contribute to developing these materials for enhanced and tunable structural integrity.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEspace ÉTS (ETS)French-language works237,207