ArticlePolymers2024
Material Characterization of Silicones for Additive Manufacturing.
Article in Polymers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three-dimensional printing is ideally suited to produce unique and complex shapes. In this study, the material properties of polysiloxanes, commonly named silicones, produced additively by two different methods, namely, multi-jet fusion (MJF) and material extrusion (ME) with liquid printing heads, are investigated. The chemical composition was compared via Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy, evolved gas analysis mass spectrometry, pyrolysis gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry, and thermogravimetry (TGA). Density and low-temperature flexibility, mechanical properties and crosslink distance via freezing point depression were measured before and after post-treatment at elevated temperatures. The results show significant differences in the chemical composition, material properties, as well as surface quality of the tested products produced by the two manufacturing routes. Chemical analysis indicates that the investigated MJF materials contain acrylate moieties, possibly isobornyl acrylate linking branches. The hardness of the MJF samples is associated with crosslinking density. In the ashes after TGA, traces of phosphorus were found, which could originate from initiators or catalysts of the curing process. The ME materials contain fillers, most probably silica, that differ in their amount. It is possible that silica also plays a role in the processing to stabilize the extrusion strand. For the harder material, a higher crosslink density was found, which was supported also by the other tested properties. The MJF samples have smooth surfaces, while the ME samples show grooved surface structures typical for the material extrusion process. Post-treatment did not improve the material properties. In the MJF samples, significant color changes were observed.
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.