ArticlePolymers2023
Experimental Study of In-Process Heat Treatment on the Mechanical Properties of 3D Printed Thermoplastic Polymer PLA.
Article in Polymers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Article
- Feasibility Study of Suitable Surface Treatments for 3D-Printed Parts to Increase Abrasion Resistance Stability.Polymers · 2026Article
- Effect of heat treatment on mechanical properties and dimensional accuracy of 3D-Printed black carbon fiber HTPLA.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Experimental Study of the Tensile Behavior of Structures Obtained by FDM 3D Printing Process.Polymers · 2024Article
- Empowering Rehabilitation: Design and Structural Analysis of a Low-Cost 3D-Printed Smart Orthosis.Polymers · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The scientific literature regarding additive manufacturing, mainly the material extrusion method, suggests that the mechanical characteristics of the parts obtained by this technology depend on a number of the input factors specific to the printing process, such as printing temperature, printing trajectory, layer height, etc., and also on the post-process operations for parts, which, unfortunately, requires supplementary setups, equipment, and multiple steps that raise the overall costs. Therefore, this paper aims to investigate the influence of the printing direction, the thickness of the deposited material layer, and the temperature of the previously deposited material layer on the part tensile strength, hardness by means of Shore D and Martens hardness, and surface finish by using an in-process annealing method. A Taguchi L9 DOE plan was developed for this purpose, where the test specimens, with dimensions according to ISO 527-2 type B, were analysed. The results showed that the presented in-process treatment method is possible and could lead to sustainable and cost-effective manufacturing processes. The varied input factors influenced all the studied parameters. Tensile strength tended to increase, up to 12.5%, when the in-process heat treatment was applied, showed a positive linear variation with nozzle diameter, and presented considerable variations with the printing direction. Shore D and Martens hardness had similar variations, and it could be observed that by applying the mentioned in-process heat treatment, the overall values tended to decrease. Printing direction had a negligible impact on the additively manufactured parts' hardness. At the same time, the nozzle diameter presented considerable variations, up to 36% for Martens hardness and 4% for Shore D, when higher diameter nozzles were used. The ANOVA analysis highlighted that the statistically significant factors were the nozzle diameter for the part's hardness and the printing direction for the tensile strength.
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.