Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40870112›Full record

ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Evaluation of PLA and PETG as 3D-Printed Reference Materials for Compressive Strength Testing.

Bartosz Budziński, Karol Federowicz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Bartosz BudzińskiFaculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, 70-310 Szczecin, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-6716-4454
Karol FederowiczFaculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, 70-310 Szczecin, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-6622-4539

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study explores the feasibility of using 3D printing technology to fabricate reference materials for validating compressive strength measurements in construction laboratories. Polylactic acid (PLA) and polyethylene terephthalate glycol-modified (PETG) were selected due to their widespread availability and use in fused deposition modeling (FDM). A series of cubic samples with varying infill levels and dimensions were printed and tested to evaluate the influence of infill density, temperature, and storage time on compressive strength. PLA samples exhibited higher compressive strength values (from 23.5 kN for 10% infill to 70.7 kN for 50% infill) and a steeper increase in strength with rising infill density compared to PETG (from 12.4 kN for 10% infill to 44.1 kN for 50% infill). However, PETG demonstrated superior stability over time, with significantly smaller increases in result variability after 31 days. The results confirm a strong linear correlation between infill level and compressive strength and indicate that even small fluctuations in ambient temperature can influence test outcomes. Despite PLA's initial mechanical advantage, PETG's aging resistance makes it a promising candidate for the development of durable and repeatable reference materials (increment of StD for PLA from 0.17 kN to 0.63 kN and 0.25 kN to 0.37 for PET-G). This research contributes to closing the gap in the availability of reliable mechanical reference materials for destructive testing, offering a novel application for 3D printing in quality control in civil engineering.

Indexed as

3D printingagingcompressive strengthconstruction material testingPETGPLAquality controlreference materials

Identifiers

PMID40870112
PMCPMC12387354

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.