ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
The Influence of Model Orientation on the Surface Roughness of Polymeric Models Produced by FFF, mSLA, PJ, and SLS Methods.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Profilometric Quantification of Wear-Track Degradation in FFF Kevlar-Reinforced ASA Composites.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Taguchi-Based and Data-Driven Assessment of Surface Roughness and Wettability in FDM-Printed Polymers.Micromachines · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The research methodology involved creating a 3D sample model that featured both flat and cylindrical surfaces inclined at angles ranging from 0° to 90° relative to the XY plane. The study investigated the surface topography of additively manufactured samples produced using various technologies, including Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF), masked Stereolithography (mSLA), PolyJet (PJ), and Selective Laser Sintering (SLS). The focus was on how material type, print angle, and measurement location influenced the results. The materials used in the study included PLA, PETG, acrylic resins, PA2200, and VeroClear. Due to the optical properties of the materials used, measurements were carried out on replicas that were prepared using a RepliSet F5 silicone compound from Struers. Consequently, a methodology was developed for measuring surface roughness using the Alicona microscope based on these replicas. A 10× objective lens was used during the measurements, and the pixel size was 0.88 µm × 0.88 µm. Each time, an area of approximately 1 mm × 4 mm was measured. The lowest roughness values were observed for mSLA samples (Sa = 6.72-8.54 µm, Spk + Sk + Svk = 33.36-42.16 µm), whereas SLS exhibited the highest roughness (Sa = 27.86 µm, Spk + Sk + Svk = 183.79 µm). PJ samples exhibited intermediate roughness with significant anisotropy (Sa = 11.65 µm, Spk + Sk + Svk = 72.1 µm), which was strongly influenced by the print angle. FFF surfaces showed directional patterns and layer-dependent roughness, with the Sa parameter being the same (12.44 µm) for both PETG and PLA materials. The steepest slopes were observed for SLS surfaces (Sdq = 7.67), while mSLA exhibited the flattest microstructure (Sdq = 0.48-0.89). Statistical analysis confirmed that material type significantly influenced topography in mSLA, while print angle strongly affected PJ and FFF (although for FFF, further studies would be beneficial). The results of the research conducted can be used to develop a methodology for optimizing the printing process to achieve the required geometric surface structure.
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.