ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Development of an Ergonomic Additively Manufactured Modular Saddle for Rehabilitation Cycling.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This work reports the design, fabrication, and validation of a modular ergonomic saddle for rehabilitation cycling, developed through a combined additive manufacturing approach. The saddle consists of a metallic support produced by Laser Powder Bed Fusion (LPBF) in AISI 316L stainless steel and a polymeric ergonomic covering fabricated via Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) using thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU). A preliminary material screening between TPU and polypropylene (PP) was conducted, with TPU selected for its superior elastic response, energy dissipation, and more favourable SLS processability, as confirmed by thermal analyses. A series of gyroid lattice configurations with varying cell sizes and wall thicknesses were designed and mechanically tested. Cyclic testing under both stress- and displacement-controlled conditions demonstrated that the configuration with 8 mm cell size and 0.3 mm wall thickness provided the best balance between compliance and stability, showing minimal permanent deformation after 10,000 cycles and stable force response under repeated displacements. Finite Element Method (FEM) simulations, parameterized using experimentally derived elastic and density data, correlated well with the mechanical results, correlated with the mechanical results, supporting comparative stiffness evaluation. Moreover, a cost model focused on the customizable TPU component confirmed the economic viability of the modular approach, where the metallic base remains a reusable standard. Finally, the modular saddle was fabricated and successfully mounted on a cycle ergometer, demonstrating functional feasibility.
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.