ArticlePolymers2023
A Study on Mechanical Properties of Low-Cost Thermoplastic-Based Materials for Material Extrusion Additive Manufacturing.
Article in Polymers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The present research focused on studying the mechanical properties of three commercially available thermoplastic-based materials used for the additive manufacturing (AM) fused filament deposition (FFD) method. The scientific motivation for the study was the limited information available in the literature regarding the materials' properties, the inconsistencies that were recorded by other scientists between the materials' properties and the technical datasheets and the anisotropic behavior of additively manufactured materials. Thereby, it was considered of great importance to perform an extensive study on several materials' mechanical properties, such as tensile properties and flexural properties. Three materials were tested, Tough PLA, nGen CF10 and UltraFuse PAHT CF15. The tests consisted of monotonic tensile tests, open-hole tensile tests and three-point bending tests. The tests were assisted also with the use of microscopical investigations. Framed specimens' configurations with two different raster orientations (90°/0° and -45°/+45°) were manufactured using an in-house-developed 3D printing equipment. The best mechanical performances were recorded for UltraFuse PAHT CF15. The 90°/0° raster orientations ensured the highest tensile, open-hole tensile and flexural strength, regardless of the material type, while the -45°/+45° raster orientations ensured the highest elongation values. The analysis showed the importance of the experimental validation of materials for AM.
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.