ArticlePolymers2026
A Multi-Physics Modeling Framework for Optimizing Spreading and Sintering Parameters in Powder Bed Fusion.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Powder Bed Fusion-Laser Beam/Polymer (PBF-LB/P) is a key additive manufacturing technology widely used in aerospace, but its process parameters are difficult to optimize for thermoplastic composites due to poor powder flowability and unstable melting regions. To address this challenge, this paper develops discrete element and finite element models to systematically determine the PBF process window for both powder spreading and sintering stages, with verified reliability. In the spreading stage, the powder layer performance is evaluated through surface profile, density, and uniformity. The effects of reinforcement phase, spreading speed, and layer thickness are analyzed, establishing reasonable spreading parameter windows. It is found that the optimal layer thickness for PEEK powder is determined to be 0.13 mm, while that for PEEK/CF composite powder is 0.12 mm. At the optimal layer thickness, the powder bed exhibits desirable properties, which minimize its adverse influence on the sintering process and serve as a prerequisite for subsequently establishing the sintering process window. For the sintering stage, sufficient sintering constraint criteria are established, and a systematic determination method is proposed. By analyzing microscopic sintering mechanisms and characterizing the effects of laser power, scanning speed, and hatching space on melt pool dimensions and temperature, a reasonable sintering process window can be efficiently determined. It is found that within the process window, the PEEK specimens achieved a maximum relative density of 99.31% and exhibited a tensile strength 13.1% higher than that of specimens processed outside the window, demonstrating a clear superiority.
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.