ArticlePolymers2023
An Investigation of the Influence of Viscosity and Printing Parameters on the Extrudate Geometry in the Material Extrusion Process.
Article in Polymers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Study of Machine Learning Models for Optimal Prediction of Printed-Line Features in Material Extrusion Additive Manufacturing.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Eco conscious synthesis of poly(tetramethylene itaconate) emphasizing inhibitor free and solvent free sustainability.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Numerical Prediction and Experimental Validation of Deposited Filaments in Direct Ink Writing: Deposition Status and Profile Dimension.Polymers · 2025Article
- The sculpting tool in bioprinting: research and application progress of sacrificial inks.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Piezoelectric poly(3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxyhexanoate) (PHBHHx) microspheres for collagen regeneration and skin rejuvenation.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Enhanced Synthesis of Poly(1,4-butanediol itaconate) via Box-Behnken Design Optimization.Polymers · 2024Article
- The Development of Poly(lactic acid) (PLA)-Based Blends and Modification Strategies: Methods of Improving Key Properties towards Technical Applications-Review.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM) of Thermoplastic-Based Filaments: Process and Rheological Properties-An Overview.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Enhancing Surface Temperature Uniformity in a Liquid Silicone Rubber Injection Mold with Conformal Heating Channels.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Material Extrusion of Wool Waste/Polycaprolactone with Improved Tensile Strength and Biodegradation.Polymers · 2023Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The material extrusion process is one of the most popular additive manufacturing processes. The presence of porosity in the MEX printed parts, which ultimately deteriorates the mechanical properties, is one of the main drawbacks of the MEX process. The porosity in the structure is related to the shape of the adjacent beads and overlapping during the material deposition. Due to the deposition nature of the MEX process, the porosity cannot be entirely removed from the printed parts. Understanding the influence of process parameters on material deposition and the rheological properties is crucial to improving the quality of the final product. In this study, the two-phase-flow numerical approach with the level-set equations has been used for the first time to model the material deposition on the moving platform in 3D. The influence of the viscosity and printing parameters, including travel speed, inlet velocity, viscosity, nozzle diameter, and layer height, on the width of the deposited bead has been investigated. The simulation results are validated against experimental measurements with an average error of 5.92%. The width measured by the experimental study shows good agreement with the results of the numerical simulation. The comparison between the results of the 3D numerical simulation and 2D simulation reveals that the 2D simulation is not appropriate and accurate enough to predict the geometry of the deposited bead with the given set of parameter settings. The key novelty of this research paper is the application of the level-set method in a 3D context for material deposition on a moving substrate.
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.