Research Article

Department of Pharmaceutics, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education & Research (NIPER)-Guwahati, Changsari, Assam, 781101, India

National Centre for Pharmacoengineering, NIPER-Guwahati, Changsari, Assam, 781101, India

Peeyush Kumar Sharma

Department of Pharmaceutics, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education & Research (NIPER)-Guwahati, Changsari, Assam, 781101, India

National Centre for Pharmacoengineering, NIPER-Guwahati, Changsari, Assam, 781101, India

Search for more papers by this author

Upadhyayula Suryanarayana Murty

National Centre for Pharmacoengineering, NIPER-Guwahati, Changsari, Assam, 781101, India

NIPER-Guwahati, Changsari, Assam, 781101, India

Search for more papers by this author

Subham Banerjee

*Author for correspondence:

E-mail Address: banerjee.subham@yahoo.co.in

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2984-1159

Department of Pharmaceutics, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education & Research (NIPER)-Guwahati, Changsari, Assam, 781101, India

National Centre for Pharmacoengineering, NIPER-Guwahati, Changsari, Assam, 781101, India

Search for more papers by this author

Published Online:28 Apr 2022https://doi.org/10.2217/3dp-2021-0031

View article

Abstract

Aim: The significant critical barrier in the ascension of fused deposition modeling (FDM) into a scalable technology is the lack of defined quality benchmarks for validating filament performance. To avoid this issue, we aimed to create a comprehensive quantitative approach providing a road map to evaluate the fabricated filament for successful FDM 3D printing. Materials & methods: A detailed in vitro physico-technological analysis including axial as well as oscillatory stress tests were performed to validate the melt-extruded filament. Results & conclusion: The results from the above-noted tests as well as microscopic examinations suggested toward the superiority of 6.5% plasticizer-loaded drug-polymer filaments in terms of mechanical prerequisites like feedability, extrudability and printability, as well as complete molecular homogenization.

Plain language summary

With the advent of technology across the board, efforts have been made to improve the quality of human health. 3D printing is one such technology that can realize the long-due dreams of personalized drug delivery according to patient-specific requirements. In the present work, an approach incorporating drugs into the feedstock material (thermoplastic filament) for 3D printing was explored for personalized administration. A vital aspect of this approach is ensuring high accuracy and precision in the 3D-printing process. Herein, a pharmaceutically approved polymer (Eudragit^® EPO) with/without drug combination, was transformed into 3D-printing feedstock (filament) and characterized for its mechanical properties when simulating the fused deposition process to determine its suitability for fused deposition modeling (FDM)-mediated 3D printing technology.

Graphical abstract

Keywords:

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: •• of considerable interest

References

1. Goyanes A, Kobayashi M, Martínez-Pacheco R, Gaisford S, Basit AW. Fused-filament 3D printing of drug products: microstructure analysis and drug release characteristics of PVA-based caplets. Int. J. Pharm. 514(1), 290–295 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
2. Skowyra J, Pietrzak K, Alhnan MA. Fabrication of extended-release patient-tailored prednisolone tablets via fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printing. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 68, 11–17 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
3. Goyanes A, Buanz ABM, Hatton GB, Gaisford S, Basit AW. 3D printing of modified-release aminosalicylate (4-ASA and 5-ASA) tablets. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 89, 157–162 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
4. Goyanes A, Buanz ABM, Basit AW, Gaisford S. Fused-filament 3D printing (3DP) for fabrication of tablets. Int. J. Pharm. 476(1), 88–92 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
5. Gioumouxouzis CI, Katsamenis OL, Bouropoulos N, Fatouros DG. 3D printed oral solid dosage forms containing hydrochlorothiazide for controlled drug delivery. J. Drug Deliv. Sci. Technol. 40, 164–171 (2017).
CASGoogle Scholar
6. Goyanes A, Robles Martinez P, Buanz A, Basit AW, Gaisford S. Effect of geometry on drug release from 3D printed tablets. Int. J. Pharm. 494(2), 657–663 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
7. Wasti S, Triggs E, Farag R et al. Influence of plasticizers on thermal and mechanical properties of biocomposite filaments made from lignin and polylactic acid for 3D printing. Compos. Part B Eng. 205, 108483 (2021).
CASGoogle Scholar
8. Bhatt U, Malakar TK, Murty US, Banerjee S. 3D printing of immediate-release tablets containing olanzapine by filaments extrusion. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1–10 (2021).
Google Scholar
9. Chai X, Chai H, Wang X et al. Fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printed tablets for intragastric floating delivery of domperidone. Sci. Reports 2017 71 7(1), 1–9 (2017).
Google Scholar
10. Saydam M, Takka S. Improving the dissolution of a water-insoluble orphan drug through a fused deposition modeling 3-dimensional printing technology approach. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 152, 152 (2020).
Google Scholar
11. Pina MF, Zhao M, Pinto JF, Sousa JJ, Craig DQM. The influence of drug physical state on the dissolution enhancement of solid dispersions prepared via hot-melt extrusion: a case study using olanzapine. J. Pharm. Sci. 103(4), 1214–1223 (2014). •• Hot-melt drug-loaded filament was characterized using differential scanning calorimetry, x-ray powder diffraction and scanning electron microscopy.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
12. Sadia M, Sośnicka A, Arafat B et al. Adaptation of pharmaceutical excipients to FDM 3D printing for the fabrication of patient-tailored immediate release tablets. Int. J. Pharm. 513(1–2), 659–668 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
13. Ade DR, Ponneganti S, Malakar TK et al. Extraction of small molecule from human plasma by prototyping 3D printed sorbent through extruded filament for LC-MS/MS analysis. Anal. Chim. Acta 1187, 339142 (2021). •• Triethyl citrate is used successfully for the Eudragit-grade polymer extrusion.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
14. Six K, Murphy J, Weuts I et al. Identification of phase separation in solid dispersions of itraconazole and Eudragit^® E100 using microthermal analysis. Pharm. Res. 20, 135–138 (2003).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
15. Yang Y, Wang H, Xu X, Yang G. Strategies and mechanisms to improve the printability of pharmaceutical polymers Eudragit^® EPO and Soluplus^®. Int. J. Pharm. 599, 120410 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
16. Xie T, Gao W, Taylor LS. Impact of Eudragit EPO and hydroxypropyl methylcellulose on drug release rate, supersaturation, precipitation outcome and redissolution rate of indomethacin amorphous solid dispersions. Int. J. Pharm. 531(1), 313–323 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
17. Melocchi A, Parietti F, Maroni A, Foppoli A, Gazzaniga A, Zema L. Hot-melt extruded filaments based on pharmaceutical grade polymers for 3D printing by fused deposition modeling. Int. J. Pharm. 509(1-2), 255–263 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
18. Henry S, De Wever L, Vanhoorne V, De Beer T, Vervaet C. Influence of print settings on the critical quality attributes of extrusion-based 3D-printed caplets: a quality-by-design approach. Pharmaceutics. 13(12), 2068 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
19. Elbadawi M, Gustaffson T, Gaisford S, Basit AW. 3D printing tablets: predicting printability and drug dissolution from rheological data. Int. J. Pharm. 590, 590 (2020).
Google Scholar
20. Ilyés K, Kovács NK, Balogh A et al. The applicability of pharmaceutical polymeric blends for the fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D technique: material considerations–printability–process modulation, with consecutive effects on in vitro release, stability and degradation. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 129, 110–123 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
21. Obeid S, Madžarević M, Krkobabić M, Ibrić S. Predicting drug release from diazepam FDM printed tablets using deep learning approach: influence of process parameters and tablet surface/volume ratio. Int. J. Pharm. 601 (2021).
Google Scholar
22. Elbadawi M, Muñiz Castro B, Gavins FKH et al. M3DISEEN: a novel machine learning approach for predicting the 3D printability of medicines. Int. J. Pharm. 590, 119837 (2020). •• A pharmaceutical software (web-based), M3DISEEN, was developed for fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printing using artificial intelligence using machine learning techniques (MLTs), by designing 614 drug-loaded formulations as an comprehensive list of 145 different pharmaceutical excipients.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
23. Muñiz Castro B, Elbadawi M, Ong JJ et al. Machine learning predicts 3D printing performance of over 900 drug delivery systems. J. Control. Rel. 337, 530–545 (2021).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
24. Nasereddin JM, Wellner N, Alhijjaj M, Belton P, Qi S. Development of a simple mechanical screening method for predicting the feedability of a pharmaceutical FDM 3D printing filament. Pharm. Res. 2018 358 35(8), 1–13 (2018). •• Using texture analyzer, force-distance curve referred to as the flexibility profile of the hot-melt extrusion (HME) filament was studied in depth.
CASGoogle Scholar
25. Parulski C, Jennotte O, Lechanteur A, Evrard B. Challenges of fused deposition modeling 3D printing in pharmaceutical applications: where are we now? Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews. 175, 113810 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
26. Shi K, Slavage JP, Maniruzzaman M, Nokhodchi A. Role of release modifiers to modulate drug release from fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printed tablets. Int. J. Pharm. 597, 597 (2021).
Google Scholar
27. Gioumouxouzis CI, Chatzitaki AT, Karavasili C et al. Controlled release of 5-fluorouracil from alginate beads encapsulated in 3D printed pH-responsive solid dosage forms. AAPS Pharm. Sci. Tech. 19(8), 3362–3375 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
28. Gioumouxouzis CI, Tzimtzimis E, Katsamenis OL et al. Fabrication of an osmotic 3D printed solid dosage form for controlled release of active pharmaceutical ingredients. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 143, 143 (2020).
Google Scholar
29. Elbadawi M. Rheological and mechanical investigation into the effect of different molecular weight poly(ethylene glycol)s on polycaprolactone-ciprofloxacin filaments. ACS Omega 4(3), 5412–5423 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
30. Alhijjaj M, Belton P, Qi S. An investigation into the use of polymer blends to improve the printability of and regulate drug release from pharmaceutical solid dispersions prepared via fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printing. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 108, 111–125 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
31. Than YM, Titapiwatanakun V. Tailoring immediate release FDM 3D printed tablets using a quality by design (QbD) approach. Int. J. Pharm. 599, 120402 (2021). •• 3 point bending test was evaluated for testing the flexibility of HME extruded filament.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
32. Zhang J, Feng X, Patil H, Tiwari RV, Repka MA. Coupling 3D printing with hot-melt extrusion to produce controlled-release tablets. Int. J. Pharm. 519(1–2), 186–197 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
33. Govender R, Ofosu Kissi E, Larsson A, Tho I. Polymers in pharmaceutical additive manufacturing: a balancing act between printability and product performance. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 113923 (2021).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
34. Suryavanshi P, Banerjee S. Exploration of theoretical and practical evaluation on Kollidon^®SR matrix mediated amorphous filament extrusion of norfloxacin by melt extrusion. J. Drug Deliv. Sci. Technol. 67, 102894 (2022).
CASGoogle Scholar
35. Bhatt U, Murty US, Banerjee S. Theoretical and experimental validation of praziquantel with different polymers for selection of an appropriate matrix for hot-melt extrusion. Int. J. Pharm. 607, 120964 (2021). •• Thermodynamic phase diagrams for suitable amorphous matrix system for HME was studied, with proper validation of the Flory–Huggins theory and construction of the phase diagram using the melting point depression approach.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
36. Chaudhari VS, Malakar TK, Murty US, Banerjee S. Extruded filaments derived 3D printed medicated skin patch to mitigate destructive pulmonary tuberculosis: design to delivery. Expert Opin. Drug Deliv. 18(2), 301–313 (2020).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
37. Kissi EO, Ruggiero MT, Hempel NJ et al. Characterising glass transition temperatures and glass dynamics in mesoporous silica-based amorphous drugs. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 21(35), 19686–19694 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
38. Kissi EO, Kasten G, Löbmann K, Rades T, Grohganz H. The role of glass transition temperatures in coamorphous drug-amino acid formulations. Mol. Pharm. 15(9), 4247–4256 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
39. Zaldivar RJ, Mclouth TD, Ferrelli GL, Patel DN, Hopkins AR, Witkin D. Effect of initial filament moisture content on the microstructure and mechanical performance of ULTEM ^® 9085 3D printed parts. Addit. Manuf. 24, 457–466 (2018). •• Mechanical test using Moduli, strain to failure and ultimate strength were studied using Universa testing machine.
CASGoogle Scholar
40. Kissi EO, Grohganz H, Löbmann K, Ruggiero MT, Zeitler JA, Rades T. Glass-transition temperature of the β-relaxation as the major predictive parameter for recrystallization of neat amorphous drugs. J. Phys. Chem. B 122(10), 2803–2808 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
41. Ding Y, Wang J, Song S. Development and optimisation of novel polymeric compositions for sustained release theophylline caplets (PrintCap) via FDM 3D printing. Polymers (Basel). 12(1), 27 (2019).
Google Scholar
42. Haryńska A, Carayon I, Kosmela P et al. A comprehensive evaluation of flexible FDM/FFF 3D printing filament as a potential material in medical application. Eur. Polym. J. 138, 109958 (2020).
CASGoogle Scholar
43. Xu P, Li J, Meda A et al. Development of a quantitative method to evaluate the printability of filaments for fused deposition modeling 3D printing. Int. J. Pharm. 588, 588 (2020).
Google Scholar
44. Ehrmann G, Ehrmann A. Investigation of the shape-memory properties of 3D printed PLA structures with different infills. Polymers (Basel). 13(1), 1–11 (2021).
Google Scholar
45. Zhang J, Xu P, Vo AQ et al. Development and evaluation of pharmaceutical 3D printability for hot melt extruded cellulose-based filaments. J. Drug Deliv. Sci. Technol. 52, 292–302 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
46. Cuan-Urquizo E, Álvarez-Trejo A, Robles Gil A et al. Effective stiffness of fused deposition modeling infill lattice patterns made of PLA-wood material. Polymers (Basel). 14(2), 337 (2022).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
47. Fuenmayor E, Forde M, Healy AV et al. Material considerations for fused-filament fabrication of solid dosage forms. Pharmaceutics 10(2), 44 (2018).
Google Scholar
48. Lin X, Gao J, Wang J et al. Desktop printing of 3D thermoplastic polyurethane parts with enhanced mechanical performance using filaments with varying stiffness. Addit. Manuf. 47, 102267 (2021).
CASGoogle Scholar
49. Borandeh S, van Bochove B, Teotia A, Seppälä J. Polymeric drug delivery systems by additive manufacturing. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 173, 349–373 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
50. Tanikella NG, Wittbrodt B, Pearce JM. Tensile strength of commercial polymer materials for fused filament fabrication 3D printing. Addit. Manuf. 15, 40–47 (2017).
CASGoogle Scholar
51. Weake N, Pant M, Sheroan A, Haleem A, Kumar H. Optimising process parameters of fused filament fabrication to achieve optimum tensile strength. Procedia Manuf. 51, 704–709 (2020).
Google Scholar
52. Naik M, Thakur DG, Chandel S. An insight into the effect of printing orientation on tensile strength of multi-infill pattern 3D printed specimen: experimental study. Mater. Today Proc. (2022) (Epub ahead of print).
Google Scholar
53. Alhijjaj M, Nasereddin J, Belton P, Qi S. Impact of processing parameters on the quality of pharmaceutical solid dosage forms produced by fused deposition modeling (FDM). Pharmaceutics 11(12), 633 (2019).
CASGoogle Scholar
54. Patil H, Tiwari RV, Repka MA. Hot-melt extrusion: from theory to application in pharmaceutical formulation. AAPS Pharm. Sci. Tech. 17(1), 20–42 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
55. Luebbert C, Klanke C, Sadowski G. Investigating phase separation in amorphous solid dispersions via Raman mapping. Int. J. Pharm. 535(1–2), 245–252 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
56. Fanous M, Bitar M, Gold S et al. Development of immediate release 3D-printed dosage forms for a poorly water-soluble drug by fused deposition modeling: study of morphology, solid state and dissolution. Int. J. Pharm. 599 (2021).
Google Scholar
57. Goyanes A, Wang J, Buanz A et al. 3D printing of medicines: engineering novel oral devices with unique design and drug release characteristics. Mol. Pharm. 12(11), 4077–4084 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
58. Perret E, Braun O, Sharma K, Tritsch S, Muff R, Hufenus R. High-resolution 2D Raman mapping of mono- and bicomponent filament cross-sections. Polymer (Guildf). 229, 124011 (2021).
CASGoogle Scholar
59. Li S, Tian Y, Jones DS, Andrews GP. Optimising drug solubilisation in amorphous polymer dispersions: rational selection of hot-melt extrusion processing parameters. AAPS Pharm. Sci. Tech. 17(1), 200–213 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
60. Okwuosa TC, Stefaniak D, Arafat B, Isreb A, Wan KW, Alhnan MA. A lower temperature FDM 3D printing for the manufacture of patient-specific immediate release tablets. Pharm. Res. 33, 2704–2712 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
61. Chen D, Xu XY, Li R et al. Preparation and in vitro evaluation of FDM 3D-printed ellipsoid-shaped gastric floating tablets with low infill percentages. AAPS Pharm. Sci. Tech. 21(6), 1–13 (2020).
Google Scholar
62. Oladeji S, Mohylyuk V, Jones DS, Andrews GP. 3D printing of pharmaceutical oral solid dosage forms by fused deposition: the enhancement of printability using plasticized HPMCAS. Int. J. Pharm. 616, 121553 (2022).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
63. Monschke M, Kayser K, Wagner KG. Processing of polyvinyl acetate phthalate in hot-melt extrusion-preparation of amorphous solid dispersions. Pharmaceutics 12(4), 337 (2020).
CASGoogle Scholar
64. Gottschalk N, Quodbach J, Elia AG, Hess F, Bogdahn M. Determination of feed forces to improve process understanding of fused deposition modeling 3D printing and to ensure mass conformity of printed solid oral dosage forms. Int. J. Pharm. 614, 121416 (2022).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
65. Solanki NG, Tahsin M, Shah AV, Serajuddin ATM. Formulation of 3D Printed tablet for rapid drug release by fused deposition modeling: screening polymers for drug release, drug-polymer miscibility and printability. J. Pharm. Sci. 107(1), 390–401 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
66. Henry S, De Vadder L, Decorte M et al. Development of a 3D-printed dosing platform to aid in Zolpidem withdrawal therapy. Pharmaceutics 13(10), 1684 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
67. Maus M, Wagner KG, Kornherr A, Zifferer G. Molecular dynamics simulations for drug dosage form development: thermal and solubility characteristics for hot-melt extrusion. Mol. Simul. 34(10–15), 1197–1207 (2008).
CASGoogle Scholar
68. Sadia M, Isreb A, Abbadi I et al. From ‘fixed dose combinations’ to ‘a dynamic dose combiner’: 3D printed bi-layer antihypertensive tablets. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 123, 484–494 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
69. Ligon SC, Liska R, Stampfl J, Gurr M, Mülhaupt R. Polymers for 3D printing and customized additive manufacturing. Chem. Rev. 117(15), 10212–10290 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
70. Tlegenov Y, Lu WF, Hong GS. A dynamic model for current-based nozzle condition monitoring in fused deposition modeling. Prog. Addit. Manuf. 4(3), 211–223 (2019).
Google Scholar
71. Coogan TJ, Kazmer DO. In-line rheological monitoring of fused deposition modeling. J. Rheol. (NY). 63(1), 141–155 (2019).
CASGoogle Scholar
72. Saba N, Jawaid M, Alothman OY, Paridah MT. A review on dynamic mechanical properties of natural fibre reinforced polymer composites. Constr. Build. Mater. 106, 149–159 (2016).
CASGoogle Scholar
73. Idrees M, Jeelani S, Rangari V. Three-dimensional-printed sustainable biochar-recycled PET composites. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 6(11), 13940–13948 (2018).
CASGoogle Scholar
74. Borrego-Sánchez A, Hernández-Laguna A, Sainz-Díaz CI. Molecular modeling and infrared and Raman spectroscopy of the crystal structure of the chiral antiparasitic drug Praziquantel. J. Mol. Model. 23(4), 1–10 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
75. Zhao Y, Xie X, Zhao Y et al. Effect of plasticizers on manufacturing ritonavir/copovidone solid dispersions via hot-melt extrusion: preformulation, physicochemical characterization, and pharmacokinetics in rats. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 127, 60–70 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
76. Guo J, Wang J, He Y et al. Triply biobased thermoplastic composites of polylactide/succinylated lignin/epoxidized soybean oil. Polym. 12(3), 632 (2020).
CASGoogle Scholar
77. Atakok G, Kam M, Koc HB. Tensile, three-point bending and impact strength of 3D printed parts using PLA and recycled PLA filaments: a statistical investigation. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 18, 1542–1554 (2022).
CASGoogle Scholar
78. Tran TQ, Canturri C, Deng X, Tham CL, Ng FL. Enhanced tensile strength of acrylonitrile butadiene styrene composite specimens fabricated by overheat fused filament fabrication printing. Compos. Part B Eng. 235, 109783 (2022).
CASGoogle Scholar
79. Netchacovitch L, Thiry J, De Bleye C et al. Global approach for the validation of an in-line Raman spectroscopic method to determine the API content in real-time during a hot-melt extrusion process. Talanta 171, 45–52 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
80. Sen K, Mukherjee R, Sansare S et al. Impact of powder-binder interactions on 3D printability of pharmaceutical tablets using drop test methodology. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 160, 160 (2021).
Google Scholar

Vol. 6, No. 2

Supplemental Materials

Metrics

Downloaded 70 times

History

Received 13 December 2021

Accepted 7 April 2022

Published online 28 April 2022

Published in print June 2022

Information

Keywords

Supplementary data

To view the supplementary data that accompany this paper please visit the journal website at: www.futuremedicine.com/doi/suppl/10.2217/3dp-2021-0031

Author contributions

U Bhatt and PK Sharma contributed to study design, experimental testing, statistical analysis and manuscript writing. S Banerjee and USN Murty contributed to concept mapping, project guidance, funding acquisition and manuscript review.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

The author acknowledges the financial support received from DPRP, DST, Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of India through a National Facility (state-of-the-art infrastructure) project entitled ‘Establishment of a National Centre of Pharmacoengineering for designing innovative delivery strategies to fight neglected diseases’ vide file no.: VI-D&P/646/2018-19/TDT. We acknowledge the Northeast Centre for Biological Sciences and Healthcare Engineering (NECBH), Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Guwahati, and the Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Govt. of India for project no. BT/COE/34/SP28408/2018 for p-XRD and DMA instrumentation facility. Raman and FESEM studies were supported by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Government of India (grant no. 5[9]/2012- NANO, vol. IV) through the Centre for Nanotechnology (CNT), IIT Guwahati, which is acknowledged. The tensile strength analysis study was supported by the Department of Mechanical Engineering, IIT Guwahati, Assam, India. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.

No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.

PDF download

Systematic evaluations of melt-extruded filament for fused deposition modeling-mediated 3D printing

Abstract

Plain language summary

Graphical abstract

References