Comparison of mechanical properties of different 3D printing technologies

This study evaluated and compared the mechanical properties of provisional 3D-printed polymers fabricated using three commonly used 3D printing technologies: stereolithography (SLA), digital light processing (DLP), and liquid crystal display (LCD). Ninety specimens, both bar-shaped and disc-shaped, were printed using standardized resin color and print settings for each technology. Flexural strength was measured using a universal testing machine, while surface hardness and roughness were evaluated using a micro-Vickers hardness tester and atomic force microscopy, respectively. Statistical analyses were performed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post-hoc tests at a significance level of p < 0.05. SLA demonstrated the highest flexural strength (93.39 ± 5.57 MPa), significantly higher than DLP (69.97 ± 8.48 MPa) and LCD (64.69 ± 8.98 MPa). Surface hardness was comparable across SLA (18.80 ± 0.57 kgf/mm<sup>2</sup>), DLP (17.80 ± 1.85 kgf/mm<sup>2</sup>), and LCD (18.27 ± 0.93 kgf/mm<sup>2</sup>). In terms of surface roughness, SLA showed the lowest mean value (14.79 ± 7.96 nm), followed by DLP (24.59 ± 9.76 nm), and LCD exhibited the highest roughness (89.87 ± 28.26 nm). The findings indicate that SLA produces polymers with superior flexural strength and the smoothest surface finish, making it preferable for applications requiring strong, high-quality surfaces, while DLP and LCD provide alternative benefits in specific use cases.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-05-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-03632-1
Citations
13
Primary Topic
Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.88

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of mechanical properties of different 3D printing technologies

Patcharanun Chaiamornsup, Jadesada Palasuk, Awutsadaporn Katheng, Wisarut Prawatvatchara et al.
13 citations
Scientific Reports
Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
8.88
article

Comparison of mechanical properties of different 3D printing technologies

Patcharanun Chaiamornsup, Jadesada Palasuk, Awutsadaporn Katheng, Wisarut Prawatvatchara, Hathairat Lekatana, Tanapon Sornsuwan
article en
13 citations

Abstract

This study evaluated and compared the mechanical properties of provisional 3D-printed polymers fabricated using three commonly used 3D printing technologies: stereolithography (SLA), digital light processing (DLP), and liquid crystal display (LCD). Ninety specimens, both bar-shaped and disc-shaped, were printed using standardized resin color and print settings for each technology. Flexural strength was measured using a universal testing machine, while surface hardness and roughness were evaluated using a micro-Vickers hardness tester and atomic force microscopy, respectively. Statistical analyses were performed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post-hoc tests at a significance level of p < 0.05. SLA demonstrated the highest flexural strength (93.39 ± 5.57 MPa), significantly higher than DLP (69.97 ± 8.48 MPa) and LCD (64.69 ± 8.98 MPa). Surface hardness was comparable across SLA (18.80 ± 0.57 kgf/mm<sup>2</sup>), DLP (17.80 ± 1.85 kgf/mm<sup>2</sup>), and LCD (18.27 ± 0.93 kgf/mm<sup>2</sup>). In terms of surface roughness, SLA showed the lowest mean value (14.79 ± 7.96 nm), followed by DLP (24.59 ± 9.76 nm), and LCD exhibited the highest roughness (89.87 ± 28.26 nm). The findings indicate that SLA produces polymers with superior flexural strength and the smoothest surface finish, making it preferable for applications requiring strong, high-quality surfaces, while DLP and LCD provide alternative benefits in specific use cases.

Scientific ReportsVol. 15(1)
Chulalongkorn University (TH), Naresuan University (TH)
Chulalongkorn University
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
8.88
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.