ArticleScientific reports2025
Effect of topological configuration on mechanical properties for 3D printed porous structures.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this work, we provide a novel BCC porous structure to explore the effect of topological configuration on mechanical properties through computer-aided design. This novel porous structure is based on BCC topological configuration and obtained by shifting the central node of the standard tetragonal configuration up and down. Furthermore, the SLM (selective laser melting, SLM) technology is used to manufacture the samples, and the mechanical properties of the designed porous structure are tested by means of simulation analysis and experiment. The results show that the provided porous structure has a high equivalent elastic modulus and a curve relationship between a higher stress plateau. Furthermore, compared with the TrBCC (traditional BCC, TrBCC) structure, the equivalent modulus of the CDBCC (Center Down BCC, CDBCC) structure under 5%, 10% and 15% volume fraction were 44.35%, 63.40% and 66.08% higher than that of the TrBCC structure. Meanwhile, the energy absorption characteristics of the CDBCC structure with 5%, 10% and 15% volume fraction increased by 31.57%, 72.42% and 27.23%, respectively. It is found that the porous configuration with the designed junction offset has better energy absorption characteristics, which provides more options for the lightweight application of porous structures with high specific stiffness and high energy absorption characteristics.
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.