ArticlePolymers2026
Experimental and Numerical Investigations on Compressive Performance of Additively Manufactured PLA Structures with Various Infill Patterns.
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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Additive manufacturing, particularly Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM), has emerged as a promising technology for construction applications due to its ability to fabricate complex geometries, optimize material usage, and enable customized designs. This study investigates the effects of different infill patterns and densities on the compressive behavior of polylactic acid (PLA) specimens to identify suitable configurations for industrial applications. Cubic specimens (50 mm × 50 mm × 50 mm) were designed in SolidWorks, sliced with PrusaSlicer using various conventional and bio-inspired infill patterns, and manufactured using a Prusa i3 MK3S printer. Compression tests were conducted to evaluate stiffness, strength, toughness, and deformation capacity. In addition, finite element method (FEM) simulations were carried out to predict the mechanical response under compressive loading. The results showed that the honeycomb infill pattern provided the best overall performance, combining moderate stiffness with high deformation capacity, reaching strains of approximately 40% before failure, and exhibiting superior energy absorption. Among the tested configurations, an infill density of 20% offered the best balance between mechanical performance, material consumption, and printing time. These findings demonstrate that honeycomb-based structures with moderate infill densities are promising candidates for lightweight engineering applications requiring high energy dissipation and damage tolerance.
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.