ArticlePolymers2025
Effect of Geometry and Size on Additively Manufactured Short-Fiber Carbon-Nylon Composite Under Tensile Loading.
Article in Polymers, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As the articles relating to the study of 3D printing processes are picking up pace, the question of comparability and repeatability based on the geometry and size of the specimens arises, based on the fact that the widely used extrusion 3D printing processes inherently have a structure that is made up of extruded lines of various shapes and sizes. This study aimed to determine the impact the specimen geometry and size have on the final tensile strength. One of the most widely used engineering materials, chopped carbon-fiber-reinforced nylon was used for this study. The four main specimen groups examined were specimens containing only walls and specimens containing only infill printed with both a 0.4 mm and 0.8 mm nozzle (to determine that the size of the extrusion lines has any effect on the tensile strength with different specimen sizes) achieving a solid body with two different line structures. Contradictory to the initial expectations, the tests showed that the geometry and size of the specimens had not influenced the tensile strength of the specimens in any of the four specimen groups. However, the tests showed that the groups containing only walls were always stronger than their only-infill counterparts and the groups printed with a 0.4 mm nozzle were stronger than the groups printed with a 0.8 mm nozzle.
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.