ArticlePolymers2022
Effect of Process Parameters on the Performance of Drop-On-Demand 3D Inkjet Printing: Geometrical-Based Modeling and Experimental Validation.
Article in Polymers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Additive Manufacturing of Neuromorphic Systems.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2025Review
- Commercially available bioinks and state-of-the-art lab-made formulations for bone tissue engineering: A comprehensive review.Materials today. Bio · 2024Review
- Rising role of 3D-printing in delivery of therapeutics for infectious disease.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2024Review
- Drug Delivery Systems in Regenerative Medicine: An Updated Review.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As additive manufacturing has evolved, 3D inkjet printing (IJP) has become a promising alternative manufacturing method able to manufacture functional multi-material parts in a single process. However, issues with part quality in terms of dimensional errors and lack of precision still restrict its industrial and commercial applications. This study aims at improving the dimensional accuracy of 3D IJP parts by developing an optimization-oriented simulation tool of droplet behavior during the drop-on-demand 3D IJP process. The simulation approach takes into consideration the effect of droplet volume, droplet center-to-center distance, coverage percentage of jetted droplets, the contact angle of the ink on the solid substrate and coalescence performance of overlapping droplets, in addition to the number of printed layers. Following the development of the simulation tool using MATLAB, its feasibility was experimentally validated and the results showed a good agreement with a maximum deviation of 2.25% for horizontal features. In addition, the simulated horizontal features are compared with the results of "Inkraster" software, which also illustrates droplet behavior, however, only in 2D. For vertical features, a dial gauge indicator is used to measure the sample height, and the validation results show that the simulation tool can predicate the height of the sample with an average error of 10.89% for a large droplet diameter and 8.09% for a small diameter. The simulation results were found to be in a good agreement with the dimensions of the printed parts. The developed tool was then used to elucidate the effect of resolution of processed TIFF image and droplet diameter on the dimensional accuracy of 3D IJP parts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.