ArticlePolymers2025
Integrating 3D Printing with Injection Molding for Improved Manufacturing Efficiency.
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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study investigates a hybrid manufacturing approach that combines 3D printing and injection molding to extend the limitations of each individual technique. Injection molding is often limited by high initial tooling costs, long lead times, and restricted geometric flexibility, whereas 3D-printed molds tend to suffer from material degradation, extended cooling times, and lower surface quality. By integrating 3D-printed molds into the injection-molding process, this hybrid method enables the production of complex geometries with improved cost-efficiency. The approach is demonstrated using a range of polymeric materials, including ABS, nylon, and polyurethane foam-each selected to enhance the mechanical and thermal performance of the final products. Finite element method (FEM) analysis was conducted to assess thermal distribution, deformation, and stress during manufacturing. Results indicated that both temperature and stress remained within safe operational limits for 3D-printed materials. An economic analysis revealed substantial cost savings compared to fully 3D-printed components, establishing hybrid manufacturing as a viable and scalable alternative. This method offers broad industrial applicability, delivering enhanced mechanical properties, design flexibility, and reduced production costs.
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.