ArticleBiomimetics (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Compressive Behavior of 316L Stainless Steel Lattice Structures for Additive Manufacturing: Experimental Characterization and Numerical Modeling.
Article in Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the Compressive Behavior of the Uniform and Graded Octet Lattice Cylindrical Shell Materials.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Formal Optimization-Oriented Design Framework for Predictive Extrusion-Based 3D Bioprinting.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Investigating property-porosity relationships for micro-architected lattice structures.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Resin-Reinforced Auxetic Structures with Re-Entrant Struts for Improved Energy Absorption.Polymers · 2025Article
- Metamortar Composites Reinforced with Re-Entrant Auxetic Cells: Mechanical Performance and Enhanced Energy Absorption.Polymers · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lattice structures produced by additive manufacturing are increasingly used in lightweight, load-bearing applications, yet their mechanical performance is strongly influenced by geometry, process parameters, and boundary conditions. This study investigates the compressive behavior of body-centered cubic (BCC) 316L stainless steel lattices fabricated by laser powder bed fusion (LPBF). Four relative densities (20%, 40%, 60%, and 80%) were achieved by varying the strut diameter, and specimens were built in both vertical and horizontal orientations. Quasi-static compression tests characterized the elastic modulus, yield strength, energy absorption, and mean force, while finite element simulations reproduced the deformation and hardening behavior. The experimental results showed a direct correlation between density and mechanical properties, with vertically built specimens performing slightly better due to reduced processing defects. Simulations quantified the effect of strut-joint rounding and the need for multi-cell configurations to closely match the experimental curves. Regardless of the boundary conditions, for a density of 20%, simulating a single cell underestimated stiffness because of unconstrained strut buckling. For higher densities and thicker struts, this sensitivity to boundary conditions strongly decreased, indicating the possibility of using a single cell for shorter simulations-a point rarely discussed in the literature. Both experiments and simulations confirmed Gibson-Ashby scaling for elastic modulus and yield strength, while the tangent modulus was highly sensitive to boundary conditions. The combined experimental and numerical results provide a framework for the reliable modeling and design of metallic lattices for energy absorption, biomedical, and lightweight structural 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.