Tuning the Properties of 3D‐Printed Electrochemical Devices by Using Different Fused Deposition Modeling Printers and Setups

Although fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printing has emerged as an accessible and versatile approach for the fabrication of electrochemical sensors, the type of printer and manufacturing setup might affect the quality of the ultimate device. In this work, the electrochemical performance of conductive polylactic acid (PLA)‐based printed sensors have been tuned by interrogating different cost classes and hardware configurations. Electrochemical behavior was investigated using cyclic voltammetry with both inner‐ and outer‐sphere redox probes, namely potassium ferricyanide (III) and hexaammineruthenium (III) chloride, to evaluate surface accessibility and electron‐transfer properties. Scanning electron microscopy and tensile tests were additionally performed to characterize electrode morphology and mechanical stability. Among the evaluated 3D printers, high‐performance systems characterized by higher automation, improved motion control, and greater extrusion stability demonstrated satisfactory outcomes. In contrast, entry‐level open‐platform systems showed lower surface utilization and reduced electrochemical performance. The results demonstrate that all printing platforms were capable of producing sensors with electrochemical functionality, comparable mechanical properties, and well‐defined architectures. However, despite negligible differences among PLA filaments, it is clear that printing time, automation, and hardware flexibility represent central factors in selecting the most suitable platform for next scaling of electrode manufacturing.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
ChemistryOpen
Published
2026-09-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/open.70303
Primary Topic
Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Tuning the Properties of 3D‐Printed Electrochemical Devices by Using Different Fused Deposition Modeling Printers and Setups

Abdulaziz K. Assaifan, Michela Volgare, Vincenzo Ianniello, Panagiota M. Kalligosfyri et al.
ChemistryOpen
Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
article

Tuning the Properties of 3D‐Printed Electrochemical Devices by Using Different Fused Deposition Modeling Printers and Setups

Abdulaziz K. Assaifan, Michela Volgare, Vincenzo Ianniello, Panagiota M. Kalligosfyri, Antonio Cutolo, Waleed Alahmad, Concetta Di Natale, Mariarosaria Bucci, Stefano Cinti, Elena Lagreca, Gennaro Persico, Filippo Defina
article en

Abstract

Although fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printing has emerged as an accessible and versatile approach for the fabrication of electrochemical sensors, the type of printer and manufacturing setup might affect the quality of the ultimate device. In this work, the electrochemical performance of conductive polylactic acid (PLA)‐based printed sensors have been tuned by interrogating different cost classes and hardware configurations. Electrochemical behavior was investigated using cyclic voltammetry with both inner‐ and outer‐sphere redox probes, namely potassium ferricyanide (III) and hexaammineruthenium (III) chloride, to evaluate surface accessibility and electron‐transfer properties. Scanning electron microscopy and tensile tests were additionally performed to characterize electrode morphology and mechanical stability. Among the evaluated 3D printers, high‐performance systems characterized by higher automation, improved motion control, and greater extrusion stability demonstrated satisfactory outcomes. In contrast, entry‐level open‐platform systems showed lower surface utilization and reduced electrochemical performance. The results demonstrate that all printing platforms were capable of producing sensors with electrochemical functionality, comparable mechanical properties, and well‐defined architectures. However, despite negligible differences among PLA filaments, it is clear that printing time, automation, and hardware flexibility represent central factors in selecting the most suitable platform for next scaling of electrode manufacturing.

ChemistryOpenVol. 15(10)
Chulalongkorn University (TH), King Saud Medical City (SA), King Saud University (SA), SDN Istituto di Ricerca Diagnostica e Nucleare (IT), BioElectronics (United States) (US), University of Naples Federico II (IT), Temple University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 20%
Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
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.