ArticleProgress in additive manufacturing2025
Effect of thermoplastic polyurethane filament on the cellular ceramics structures obtained from material extrusion and polymer-derived ceramic.
Article in Progress in additive manufacturing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cellular ceramic structures were fabricated via 3D printing of thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) followed by impregnation with polysilazane, and pyrolysis. The 3D printing was performed using fused filament fabrication (FFF), while the ceramic was obtained through the polymer derived ceramic (PDC) process starting from a commercially available polysilazane, Durazane 1800. We investigated the role of ester- and ether-based TPUs with two different Shore hardness (90A vs 80A) on the impregnation of polysilazane. Regardless of the TPU type and Shore hardness, impregnation of the TPU 3D structure was successful and resulted in dense, non-hollow ceramic struts after pyrolysis. All polyester- and polyether-based TPUs showed a similar mass and volume increase after impregnation with high deviation. The mass loss during pyrolysis was also very similar for all the TPUs. The behavior of these TPUs was then compared with one commercial TPU filament (Ninjaflex with a Shore hardness of 85A). While the Ninjaflex 3D-printed structures showed a greater increase in mass and volume after impregnation, the pyrolysis outcome was almost identical to that of the samples fabricated with both ester- and ether-based TPUs, resulting in dense, non-hollow ceramic struts. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40964-025-01243-w.
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.