ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Profilometric Quantification of Wear-Track Degradation in FFF Kevlar-Reinforced ASA Composites.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fused filament fabrication (FFF) produces components with characteristic topographical features that influence their tribological behavior. Because conventional roughness parameters may not fully describe the localized surface degradation of reinforced FFF polymers, this study evaluates the wear-track evolution of FFF aramid fiber-reinforced Acrylonitrile Styrene Acrylate (ASA) composites using a comparative profilometric framework based on pre-wear and post-wear measurements. Specimens with different infill configurations underwent dry sliding Ball-on-Disc tribological testing, followed by profilometric wear-track analysis and optical microscopy inspection. The macroscopic wear response exhibited a non-monotonic dependence on infill configuration. Under the present experimental conditions, the 30% infill configuration showed the most favorable average wear response, with the lowest wear volume and specific wear rate, whereas the 90% infill configuration showed the highest material loss. To compare the surface modifications induced by sliding, three derived relative profilometric descriptors were evaluated: Surface Texture Alteration Index (STAI), Peak Deformation Index (PDI) and Material Ratio Preservation Index (MRPI). These descriptors were used as complementary comparative parameters rather than replacements for standardized roughness or Abbott-Firestone-based measurements. Statistical analysis showed a very strong association between maximum wear-track depth and calculated volumetric material loss, indicating that deeper wear-track profiles were consistently associated with higher material removal within the investigated dataset. Furthermore, correlation analysis suggested that the initial material ratio may be more closely associated with the subsequent wear response than the initial arithmetic mean roughness. This study indicates that combining wear volume, wear-track geometry, optical microscopy and relative profilometric descriptors provides a useful comparative approach for evaluating degradation in FFF Kevlar-reinforced ASA components under sliding conditions.
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.