ArticlePolymers2024
Optimizing the Dielectric and Mechanical Performance of 3D-Printed Cellulose-Based Biocomposites and Bionanocomposites through Factorial Design for Electrical Insulation Application.
Article in Polymers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Hydroxyethyl cellulose-based ZnCeRSC advances · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Materials for low-permittivity and electrical insulation applications need to be re-engineered to achieve sustainable development. To address this challenge, the proposed study focused on the dielectric and mechanical optimization of 3D-printed cellulose-based composites for electrical insulation applications. Two different fillers, microcrystalline cellulose (MCC) and nanocrystalline cellulose (NCC), were used to create biocomposites and bionanocomposites, respectively, blended into a polylactic acid (PLA) matrix. The effects of infill ratio, printing temperature, and filler content on dielectric and mechanical properties were measured using an incomplete L9 (3^3) factorial design. The findings showed that the infill ratio was the most significant factor influencing the properties tested, directly attributable to the increase in material availability for polarization and mechanical performance. The second most influential factor was the filler content, increasing the polarity of the tested composites and decreasing the toughness of the biocomposites and bionanocomposites. Finally, printing temperature had no significant effect. Results for the biocomposites at a 50% infill ratio, 200 °C printing temperature, and a weight content of MCC of 15% gave a 60% higher tensile-mode stiffness than neat PLA printed under the same conditions, while exhibiting lower dielectric properties than neat PLA printed with a 100% infill ratio. These results pave the way for new lightweight materials for electrical insulation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.