ArticlePolymers2026
Integrated Evaluation of Electrical Breakdown Strength and Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed Polymers, Supplemented by ImageJ-Based Surface Damage Analysis.
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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fused deposition modelling (FDM) is being increasingly considered for manufacturing electrically insulating components with complex geometries; however, the relationship between mechanical performance and dielectric breakdown behaviour of common printable polymers remains insufficiently understood. This study investigates the electrical insulation potential of five FDM-printed thermoplastic polymers-ABS, PLA, PETG, ASA, and PC/ABS-by evaluating their dielectric breakdown strength and mechanical properties. Specimens were fabricated using fused deposition modelling and tested according to standardised procedures: dielectric breakdown strength was measured in accordance with IEC 60243, and tensile properties were determined following ASTM D638. Surface damage produced during breakdown events, including holes and carbonised regions, was quantified using ImageJ analysis. The results were evaluated comparatively to identify the advantages and limitations of each material for electrical insulation applications. Among the tested materials, PLA exhibited the highest mechanical strength and the lowest surface damage area, whereas ABS demonstrated the highest dielectric breakdown strength. These findings highlight the trade-offs between mechanical and dielectric performance in material selection for 3D-printed insulators, and they demonstrate that ImageJ-based damage analysis serves as a valuable supplementary tool for characterising breakdown behaviour.
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.