ArticleACS applied polymer materials2025
Microscale Computed Tomography (μCT) Imaging of Leak Pathways for Optimized Leak-Free 3D Printed Fluidics.
Article in ACS applied polymer materials, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
3D printing is a highly attractive method for manufacturing micro- and millifluidic devices due to fast fabrication times and a low barrier to entry. Of the common 3D printing methods, fused filament fabrication (FFF) is the most accessible but is also susceptible to leakages when using default printer settings. Here, we combine microscale computed tomography (μCT) X-ray imaging with bulk leak testing to understand the fundamental structural reasons why leakages occur, and the effect of optimizing print parameters. In contrast to previous recommendations, we show that the amount of infill can be reduced as required, with print bodies being intrinsically porous, regardless of infill. Instead, we find that it is solely the channel wall quality that determines whether leaks will occur. In keeping with previous reports, we see that smaller layer heights (<0.1 mm) and increased flow rates (>100% compared to the recommended rate) are key to preventing leakage, and show this is because of their positive effect on channel wall formation. A key consequence of being able to maintain channel integrity while using low infill values is that print times and material costs can be greatly reduced (over 50% time and cost savings for the test pieces used here) without compromising device performance.
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.