Factorial design evaluates printing parameters affecting surface quality and thermal stability in sustainable filaments, suggesting improvements for broader applications.
The increasing demand for sustainable materials has accelerated the development of environmentally friendly filaments for fused deposition modeling (FDM). In this study, the surface roughness and thermal degradation behavior of sustainable PLA-based filaments, including PLA, recycled PLA (Re–PLA), and wood-filled PLA (Wood–PLA), were systematically investigated under different FDM printing conditions. A full factorial experimental design was employed to identify the dominant processing parameters and optimize surface quality. Surface roughness was evaluated using values Ra, Rz, and Rq parameters measured on three different surface orientations (top surface at 0°, top surface at 45°, and side surface). Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to examine the relationship between roughness measurements and surface morphology, while thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) was performed to evaluate the thermal degradation behavior of the filaments in relation to printing temperature. The results have shown that filament material is the most important parameter affecting surface roughness. While Wood–PLA exhibited the highest roughness due to fiber-induced surface heterogeneity, recycled Re–PLA showed moderate surface irregularities resulting from degradation compared to pure PLA. Despite a rougher filament surface prior to production, recycled PLA exhibited a surface morphology similar to that of pure PLA after printing, influenced by the processing parameters. Furthermore, SEM findings indicated that the Ra parameter predominantly reflects macro-scale surface topography, while local microstructural heterogeneity can be better characterized by complementary roughness parameters such as Rz. These findings support optimizing printing conditions to improve surface quality and more widespread use of sustainable FDM filaments in applications where surface roughness is critical.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Erman Zurnacı (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: