ArticlePolymers2025
Comparative Analysis of Dimensional Accuracy in PLA-Based 3D Printing: Effects of Key Printing Parameters and Related Variables.
Article in Polymers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hybrid FFF-CNC Processing of PLA Fixtures with Gyroid Internal Structures.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Mechanical Performance and Artificial Aging Behavior of Reinforced 3D-Printed PLA Structures for Drone Arm Application.Polymers · 2026Article
- Process-Structure Relationships Governing Dimensional Accuracy in Material-Extrusion-Printed PLA-Based Composites.Polymers · 2026Article
- Parameter Optimisation in 3D Extrusion Printing of Polyhydroxybutyrate Using Design of Experiment Methodology.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Additive manufacturing - an antidote to bottlenecks in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Article
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
This study examines the impact of key printing parameters on the dimensional accuracy of 3D printing, specifically Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) using PLA, utilizing two widely adopted printers: the LulzBot TAZ Pro and the Prusa MK4. A simplified parallel-line model was used to systematically evaluate the effects of print speed, nozzle temperature, bed temperature, and layer height on accuracy along the X, Y, and Z axes. The results showed that the Prusa MK4 generally provided better dimensional accuracy at lower print speeds (20-40 mm/s), higher nozzle temperatures (230 °C), and smaller layer heights (0.05 mm). In contrast, the LulzBot TAZ Pro performed better at higher print speeds (40-60 mm/s) and with thicker layers (0.2 mm). Scanning electron microscopy analysis further revealed distinct surface morphologies depending on the printer and parameter settings. These findings offer practical guidance for selecting suitable print settings across various application areas.
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.