ArticleScientific reports2025
Bending strength measurement of structures printed via fused deposition modeling with different infill patterns.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Additive Manufacturing (AM) processes are new ways of producing techniques that work by printing parts layer upon layer using 3D models. AM has some subcategories, which are classified according to the used parent materials. Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) is a material-extrusion-based technique and is mostly used for rapid prototyping and in some cases for a real servicing part. In the FDM technique, input parent materials are commercial polymers and also, it has some important manufacturing parameters including raster and layer configurations, infill density, layer height, nozzle and bed temperatures, nozzle diameter, and printing speed. Among the mentioned parameters, the infill pattern has a significant effect on the mechanical performance of the FDM products. Thus, the current paper surveyed the effect of five different infill patterns (Grid, Triangle, Wiggle, Fast honeycomb, and Full honeycomb) on the tensile and bending strength of the FDM-Polylactic Acid (FDM-PLA) specimens. Each bending specimen has 50 layers, 10 layers from top and bottom considered solid state, and 30 middle layers printed with the mentioned infill patterns. The results revealed that the specimens that were printed with a Wiggle infill pattern showed the highest values of mechanical properties. For instance, the ultimate tensile strength of the Wiggle and Full honeycomb infill patterns were 43.11 MPa and 28.33 MPa, respectively. However, the Triangle infill pattern presented the highest bending strength (failure load was 9,341 N) and the lowest failure strength was related to the specimens printed with a Full honeycomb infill pattern (failure load was 6,394 N). The obtained results in this paper are comprehensively discussed in the results and discussion section.
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.