Height-to-Diameter Ratio and Porosity Strongly Influence Bulk Compressive Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed Polymer Scaffolds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the architectural design parameters of 3D-printed polymer-based scaffolds—porosity, height-to-diameter (H/D) ratio and pore size—are significant determinants of their mechanical integrity, their impact has not been explicitly discussed when reporting bulk mechanical properties. Controlled architectures were designed by systematically varying porosity (30–75%, H/D ratio (0.5–2.0) and pore size (0.25–1.0 mm) and fabricated using fused filament fabrication technique. The influence of the three parameters on compressive mechanical properties—apparent elastic modulus Eapp, bulk yield stress σy and yield strain εy—were investigated through a multiple linear regression analysis. H/D ratio and porosity exhibited strong influence on the mechanical behavior, resulting in variations in mean Eapp of 60% and 95%, respectively. σy was comparatively less sensitive to H/D ratio over the range investigated in this study, with 15% variation in mean values. In contrast, porosity resulted in almost 100% variation in mean σy values. Pore size was not a significant factor for mechanical behavior, although it is a critical factor in the biological behavior of the scaffolds. Quantifying the influence of porosity, H/D ratio and pore size on bench-top tested bulk mechanical properties can help optimize the development of bone scaffolds from a biomechanical perspective.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".