ArticlePolymers2025
Influence of the Fill Value Parameters on Acoustic and Physical-Mechanical Performance of 3D-Printed Panels.
Article in Polymers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigates the acoustic and mechanical performance of three types of 3D-printed polylactic acid (PLA) panels with varying infill densities (5-100%) and structural configurations. Using fused filament fabrication (FFF), panels were designed as follows: Type 1 (core infill only), Type 2 (core infill + 1.6 mm shell), and Type 3 (core infill + multi-layer shells). Acoustic testing via impedance tube revealed that Type 2 panels with a 65% infill density achieved the highest sound absorption coefficient (α = 0.99), while Type 1 panels exhibited superior sound transmission loss (TLn = 53.3 dB at 60% infill). Mechanical testing demonstrated that shell layers improved tensile and bending resistance by 25.7% and 36.9%, respectively, but reduced compressive strength by 23.6%. Microscopic analysis highlighted ductile failure in Type 2 and brittle fracture in Type 3. The optimal panel thickness for acoustic performance was identified as 4 mm, balancing material efficiency and sound absorption. These findings underscore the potential of tailored infill parameters in sustainable noise-control applications.
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.