ArticlePolymers2026
Influence of Strain-Offset-Based Yield Definitions on the Accuracy of Finite Element Analysis of 3D-Printed PLA with Different Raster Orientations.
Article in Polymers, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computational mechanics is one of the techniques used to predict and optimize material behavior and structural performance. However, modeling a complex material model and achieving an accurate response in finite element analysis (FEA) remains a challenge. This study investigates the mechanical material properties of 3D-printed polylactic acid (PLA) by integrating tensile testing and FEA to optimize material behavior. The tensile testing was conducted on three different raster orientations (0°, 45°, and 90°), and the resultant stress-strain data were used to calibrate FEA models. For FEA nonlinear material modeling, isotropic elasticity was combined with a multilinear plasticity model, where the yield stress values were determined by using the strain offset method. Six different strain offsets (SOs), i.e., 0%, 0.007%, 0.01%, 0.02%, 0.05%, and 0.2%, were analyzed to evaluate their impact on the accuracy of the FEA results against the experimental results. The results highlight a significant influence of strain offset selection on the plastic region estimation and overall accuracy. The commonly used 0.2% strain offset method (SOM) significantly overestimated the plastic region, while 0% strain offset provided the most accurate simulation response. These results emphasize the importance of selecting the correct yield stress value for 3D-printed nonlinear material modeling in FEA simulations.
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.