ArticleACS applied materials & interfaces2024
Nanodroplet Flight Control in Electrohydrodynamic Redox 3D Printing.
Article in ACS applied materials & interfaces, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nanodroplet-Confined Electroplating Enables Submicron Printing of Metals and Oxide Ceramics.ACS nano · 2026Article
- Electrohydrodynamic redox printing vs. physical vapour deposition: a comparative study of nanoporous Ag morphology and SERS performance.Discover nano · 2025Article
- Droplet-Confined Electroplating for Nanoscale Additive Manufacturing: Current Control of the Initial Stages of Growth of Copper Nanowires.ACS electrochemistry · 2025Article
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
Electrohydrodynamic 3D printing is an additive manufacturing technique with enormous potential in plasmonics, microelectronics, and sensing applications thanks to its broad material palette, high voxel deposition rate, and compatibility with various substrates. However, the electric field used to deposit material is concentrated at the depositing structure, resulting in the focusing of the charged droplets and geometry-dependent landing positions, which complicates the fabrication of complex 3D shapes. The low level of concordance between the design and printout seriously impedes the development of electrohydrodynamic 3D printing and rationalizes the simplicity of the designs reported so far. In this work, we break the electric field centrosymmetry to study the resulting deviation in the flight trajectory of the droplets. Comparison of experimental outcomes with predictions of an FEM model provides new insights into the droplet characteristics and unveils how the product of droplet size and charge uniquely governs its kinematics. From these insights, we develop reliable predictions of the jet trajectory and allow the computation of optimized printing paths counterbalancing the electric field distortion, thereby enabling the fabrication of geometries with unprecedented complexity.
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.