What type of study is this?

This is a In Vitro Study study.

August 17, 2025Open Access

Physico-Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed Filament Materials for Mouthguard Manufacturing

Key Points

DSM Arnitel ID 2045 exhibited high-impact energy absorption while maintaining low fluid sorption, making it ideal for mouthguard use.
The highest tensile strength was found in Copper 3D PLActive and Spectrum Medical ABS, essential for durability in mouthguard applications.
Testing showed NinjaFlex had the lowest abrasion resistance, highlighting a need for potential frequency in replacements.
This research compares five filament materials against traditional methods, showcasing the advancements of 3D printing in custom mouthguard fabrication.

Abstract

Mouthguards are recommended for all sports that may cause injuries to the head and oral cavity. Custom mouthguards, made conventionally in the thermoforming process from ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA), face challenges with thinning at the incisor area during the process. In contrast, additive manufacturing (AM) processes enable the precise reproduction of the dimensions specified in a computer-aided design (CAD) model. The potential use of filament extrusion materials in the fabrication of custom mouthguards has not yet been explored in comparative studies. Our research aimed to compare five commercially available filaments for the material extrusion (MEX) also known as fused deposition modelling (FDM) of custom mouthguards using a desktop 3D printer. Samples made using Copper 3D PLActive, Spectrum Medical ABS, Braskem Bio EVA, DSM Arnitel ID 2045, and NinjaFlex were compared to EVA Erkoflex, which served as a control sample. The samples underwent tests for ultimate tensile strength (UTS), split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) performance, drop-ball impact, abrasion resistance, absorption, and solubility. The results showed that Copper 3D PLActive and Spectrum Medical ABS had the highest tensile strength. DSM Arnitel ID 2045 had the highest dynamic property performance, measured with the SHPB and drop-ball tests. On the other hand, NinjaFlex exhibited the lowest abrasion resistance and the highest absorption and solubility. DSM Arnitel ID 2045’s absorption and solubility levels were comparable to those of EVA, but had significantly lower abrasion resistance. Ultimately, DSM Arnitel ID 2045 is recommended as the best filament for 3D-printing mouthguards. The properties of this biocompatible material ensure high-impact energy absorption while maintaining low fluid sorption and solubility, supporting its safe intra-oral application for mouthguard fabrication. However, its low abrasion resistance indicated that mouthguards made from this material may need to be replaced more frequently.

Ask AI

Helpful

Bookmark

View Full Paper