ArticlePolymers2025
Quantitative Assessment of Voids' Impact on Mechanical Properties of Standard Dogbone Model Versus End-User Component in Non-Linear Geometry.
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
Abstract
Additive manufacturing (AM) offers advantages such as design flexibility and reduced production times, but defects like voids impact mechanical performance and limit its broader adoption. This study quantitatively examines the relationship between void characteristics (volume fraction, distribution, and size) and mechanical properties in both linear and non-linear geometries, represented by a dogbone model and an end-use component, respectively. Samples were produced using Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF) with varying overlap levels to control void content. As the overlap increased from 0% to 99%, voids transitioned from large linear gaps to smaller point-shaped voids. In non-linear geometry, void reduction from 12% to 2% led to a threefold improvement in mechanical response, while in dogbone samples, voids decreased from 12% to nearly 0%, improving the elastic modulus by only 1.5 times. This disparity is due to differences in void distribution, as voids in non-linear geometries affect both margins and internal layers, significantly influencing structural integrity. The findings highlight the importance of the void location in determining mechanical performance and emphasize the limitations of using linear dogbone models to assess void-property relationships in complex 3D-printed structures.
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.