Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41150345›Full record

ReviewPolymers2025

Accuracy and Powder Removal Limits in Multi Jet Fusion 3D Printing.

Karel Raz, Zdenek Chval, Petra Faitova

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Karel RazFaculty of Mechanical Engineering, Regional Technological Institute, University of West Bohemia, Univerzitni 2732/8, 301 00 Plzen, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0001-8768-0317
Zdenek ChvalFaculty of Mechanical Engineering, Regional Technological Institute, University of West Bohemia, Univerzitni 2732/8, 301 00 Plzen, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-6751-559X
Petra FaitovaFaculty of Mechanical Engineering, Regional Technological Institute, University of West Bohemia, Univerzitni 2732/8, 301 00 Plzen, Czech Republic.

Funding

Grant Agency of the University of West Bohemia: Long-term conceptual development of a research organization Long-term conceptual development of a research organization
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multi Jet Fusion (MJF) is a leading technology for producing functional polymer parts. However, it still faces challenges with dimensional accuracy and removing unfused powder from complex internal geometries. First, dimensional accuracy was mapped by producing 45 identical PA12 specimens on an HP MJF 4200 printer in a 5 × 9 layout across five vertical layers. The analysis revealed a consistent pattern: parts located in the central positions of the build volume exhibited the poorest accuracy, while those near the perimeter were the most precise, regardless of their vertical height. This spatial variation is attributed to non-uniform thermal control from the printer's adaptive lamp-thermal camera system. Second, the limits of powder removal from closed body-centered cubic (BCC) lattice structures were quantified. Using sandblasting and X-ray inspection, a strong inverse relationship was found between a lattice's relative density and the maximum thickness that could be thoroughly cleaned of powder. For example, low-density structures (ρ = 0.07) could be cleaned up to five layers deep, whereas high-density structures (ρ = 0.39-0.47) were limited to only 1.5-1.7 layers. These findings offer actionable guidelines for optimizing part placement and designing internal lattice structures for MJF technology. The key findings are the spatial variation in dimensional accuracy in MJF printing, where the central parts are the least accurate and perimeter parts are the most precise, and the inverse relationship between a lattice's relative density (ρ) and cleanable thickness. Specifically, low-density structures (ρ = 0.07) could be thoroughly cleaned up to five layers, while high-density ones (ρ = 0.39-0.47) were limited to approximately 1.5-1.7 layers. The layer thickness was a pre-designed parameter (2, 3, 4, and 5 layers), and powder removal was supported by using automated sandblasting followed by verification via industrial X-ray imaging.

Indexed as

3D printingaccuracylatticeMJFnylon

Identifiers

PMID41150345
PMCPMC12567854

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.