Khzzal, R., Nafaa, M., Hamdan, W. (2025). Optimizing 3D printing parameters for PLA and PETG: advancing high-quality skull implant production. , 43(12), 1229-1240. doi: 10.30684/etj.2025.161729.1973
Reem S. Khzzal; Marwan A. Nafaa; Wisam K. Hamdan. "Optimizing 3D printing parameters for PLA and PETG: advancing high-quality skull implant production". , 43, 12, 2025, 1229-1240. doi: 10.30684/etj.2025.161729.1973
Khzzal, R., Nafaa, M., Hamdan, W. (2025). 'Optimizing 3D printing parameters for PLA and PETG: advancing high-quality skull implant production', , 43(12), pp. 1229-1240. doi: 10.30684/etj.2025.161729.1973
Khzzal, R., Nafaa, M., Hamdan, W. Optimizing 3D printing parameters for PLA and PETG: advancing high-quality skull implant production. , 2025; 43(12): 1229-1240. doi: 10.30684/etj.2025.161729.1973

Optimizing 3D printing parameters for PLA and PETG: advancing high-quality skull implant production

Engineering and Technology Journal
Volume 43, Issue 12, December 2025, Pages 1229-1240    PDF (944.56 K)
Document Type: Research Paper
DOI: 10.30684/etj.2025.161729.1973
Authors
Reem S. Khzzal* 1; Marwan A. Nafaa2; Wisam K. Hamdan2
1College of Production and Metallurgy Engineering, University of Technology- Iraq, Alsina’a Street, 10066 Baghdad, Iraq.
2College of Bio-Medical Engineering, University of Technology- Iraq, Alsina’a Street, 10066 Baghdad, Iraq.
Abstract
This study investigates the mechanical performance of 3D-printed polylactic acid and polyethylene terephthalate glycol materials by examining the effects of three crucial printing parameters (layer thickness, infill density, and infill pattern). Each material was tested mechanically for impact toughness, flexural strength, ductility, and ultimate tensile strength (UTS) using a Box-Behnken Design (BBD) to create 15 samples. The statistical significance of each parameter's impact was evaluated using ANOVA. The findings showed that, for PLA, layer thickness had no discernible impact on impact toughness (p = 0.726), while infill density (p = 0.031) and infill pattern (p = 0.049) had the most significant effects. In PETG, layer thickness (p = 0.038) and infill pattern (p = 0.021) significantly impacted impact toughness. None of the parameters had a statistically significant impact on the flexural strength of either material.PETG was highly responsive to the same factor (p = 0.022), and PLA was highly sensitive to the infill pattern (p = 0.003) regarding ductility. Both materials' UTS were significantly impacted by infill density, and PETG showed a high sensitivity to the infill pattern (p = 0.004). The ideal parameters for polyethylene terephthalate glycol (PETG) were a tri-hexagonal pattern, a 0.3 mm layer thickness, and an 80% infill density; for polylactic acid (PLA), they were a 0.15 mm layer thickness, an 80% infill density, and a grid infill pattern. These optimized settings were successfully used to create a PETG-based skull implant and functional test prints, demonstrating the applicability of the optimization strategy in practical situations.

Highlights

 

  • 3D printing parameters for PLA and PETG were optimized using Box-Behnken design and ANOVA.
  • Optimal settings were PLA: grit pattern, 80% infill, 0.15 mm layer; PETG: tri-hexagonal, 80% infill, 0.3 mm.
  • PLA was highly sensitive to the infill pattern (p = 0.003) regarding ductility.
  • A functional skull implant was successfully printed using the optimized PETG parameters.
Keywords
Skull implant; Mechanical properties; Analysis of variance (ANOVA); PETG; PLA; Optimization
References
  1. T. Balint, J. Živčák, R. Hudák, T. Tóth, M. Kohan, S. Lancoš, Destructive and Non-Destructive Testing of Samples from PLA and PETG Materials, IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 1199, 2021, 012045. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/1199/1/012045
  2. P. Turek, E. Dudek, M. Grzywa, K. Więcek, The Process of Digital Data Flow in RE/CAD/RP/CAI Systems Concerning Planning Surgical Procedures in the Craniofacial Area, Polymers, 4 (2024) 265–279. https://doi.org/10.3390/knowledge4020014
  3. J. Forbes, A. Xu, Y. Al-Fawares, O. Ghalsasi, V. Venugopal, M. Aryal, M. McConaha, J. Cheng, A. Matur, G. Yang, L. B. Ngwenya, S. Anand, Towards Global Availability of Patient-Specific Cranial Implants: Creation and Validation of CranialRebuild Freeware Application, Neurosurgery, 69 (2023) 22–23. https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000002375_170
  4. M. Haffner, A. Quinn, T. Hsieh, E. B. Strong, T. Steele, Optimization of 3D Print Material for the Recreation of Patient-Specific Temporal Bone Models, Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol., 127 (2018) 338–343. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003489418764987
  5. S. Petersmann, M. Spoerk, W. Van De Steene, M. Üçal, J. Wiener, G. Pinter, F. Arbeiter, Mechanical Properties of Polymeric Implant Materials Produced by Extrusion-Based Additive Manufacturing, J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 104 (2020) 103611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2019.103611
  6. R. F. Martins, R. Branco, M. Martins, W. Macek, Z. Marciniak, R. Silva, D. Trindade, C. Moura, M. Franco, C. Malça, Mechanical Properties of Additively Manufactured Polymeric Materials—PLA and PETG—For Biomechanical Applications, Polymers, 16 (2024) 1868. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym16131868
  7. M. Katschnig, J. Wallner, T. Janics, C. Burgstaller, W. Zemann, C. Holzer, Biofunctional Glycol-Modified Polyethylene Terephthalate and Thermoplastic Polyurethane Implants by Extrusion-Based Additive Manufacturing for Medical 3D Maxillofacial Defect Reconstruction, Polymers, 12 (2020) 1751. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12081751
  8. C.-F. Popaa, M.-P. Mărghitașa, S.-V. Galațanua, L. Marșavina, Influence of Thickness on the IZOD Impact Strength of FDM Printed Specimens from PLA and PETG, Procedia Struct. Integr., 41 (2022) 557–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prostr.2022.05.064
  9. S. N. Schön, N. Skalicky, N. Sharma, D. W. Zumofen, F. M. Thieringer, 3D-Printer-Assisted Patient-Specific Polymethyl Methacrylate Cranioplasty: A Case Series of 16 Consecutive Patients, World Neurosurg., 148 (2021) e356–e362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2020.12.138
  10. D. Chamo, B. Msallem, N. Sharma, S. Aghlmandi, C. Kunz, F. Thieringer, Accuracy Assessment of Molded, Patient-Specific Polymethylmethacrylate Craniofacial Implants Compared to Their 3D Printed Originals, J. Clin. Med., 9 (2020) 832. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9030832
  11. S. Valvez, A. P. Silva, P. N. B. Reis, Optimization of Printing Parameters to Maximize the Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed PETG-Based Parts, Polymers, 14 (2022) 2564. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14132564
  12. N. Naveed, M. N. Anwar, Optimising 3D Printing Parameters Through Experimental Techniques and ANOVA-Based Statistical Analysis, SPE Polymers, (2024) 228–240. https://doi.org/10.1002/pls2.10122
  13. P. Mishra, S. Sood, V. Bharadwaj, A. Aggarwal, P. Khanna, Parametric Modeling and Optimization of Dimensional Error and Surface Roughness of FDM Printed Polyethylene Terephthalate Glycol Parts, Polymers, 15 (2023) 546. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym15030546
  14. N. Dissanayaka, H. Alexander, D. Carluccio, M. Redmond, L.-J. Vandi, J.I. Novak, How Safe Are 3D-Printed Skull Models for Neurosurgical Simulation? Measurement of Airborne Particles and VOCs While Burr Hole Drilling, Rapid Prototyping. J., 30 (2024) 1046–1054. https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-09-2023-0318
  15. A. R. Mohammed, W. K. Jawad, Experimental and Theoretical Investigations of Octagonal Shapes Using Multi-Stage Deep Drawing Process, AIP Conf. Proc., 2023.
  16. M. A. Abdullah, T. F. Abbas, Investigation and Prediction of the Impact of FDM Process Parameters on Mechanical Properties of PLA Prints, Eng. Technol. J., 41 (2023) 1465–1473. https://doi.org/10.30684/etj.2023.140389.1466
  17. R. Srinivasan, P. Prathap, A. Raj, S. A. Kannan, V. Deepak, Influence of Fused Deposition Modeling Process Parameters on the Mechanical Properties of PETG Parts, Mater. Today Proc., 27 (2020) 1877–1883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.03.809
  18. K. Tappa, U. Jammalamadaka, J. A. Weisman, D. H. Ballard, D. D. Wolford, C. Pascual-Garrido, L. M. Wolford, P. K. Woodard, D. K. Mills, 3D Printing Custom Bioactive and Absorbable Surgical Screws, Pins, and Bone Plates for Localized Drug Delivery, J. Funct. Biomater., 10 (2019) 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb10020017
  19. M. R. Derise, A. Zulkharnain, Effect of Infill Pattern and Density on Tensile Properties of 3D Printed Polylactic Acid Parts via Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM), Int. J. Mech. Mechatron. Eng., 20 (2021) 54–62.
  20. M. Daly, M. Tarfaoui, M. Bouali, A. Bendarma, Effects of Infill Density and Pattern on the Tensile Mechanical Behavior of 3D-Printed Glycolyzed Polyethylene Terephthalate Reinforced with Carbon-Fiber Composites by the FDM Process, J. Compos. Sci., 8 (2024) 115. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs8040115
  21. D. Singh, H. Singh, Influence of 3D Printing Parameters on Mechanical Properties of the PLA Parts Made by FDM Additive Manufacturing Process, 2 (2022) 7–20. https://doi.org/10.4028/p-4isiu8
  22. A. R. Kafshgar, S. Rostami, M. R. M. Aliha, F. Berto, Optimization of Properties for 3D Printed PLA Material Using Taguchi, ANOVA and Multi-Objective Methodologies, Procedia Struct. Integr., 34 (2021) 71–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prostr.2021.12.011
  23. A. Agrawal, S. Bhandari, P. Soni, Printing Parameter Optimization of Additive Manufactured PLA Using Taguchi Method, Polymers, 15 (2023) 4370. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym15224370
  24. J. Sultana, M. M. Rahman, Y. Wang, Influences of 3D printing parameters on the mechanical properties of wood PLA filament: an experimental analysis by Taguchi method, Prog. Addit. Manuf., 9 (2024) 1239–1251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40964-023-00516-6
  25. B. A. Ahmed, U. Nadeem, A. S. Hakeem, A. Ul-Hamid, M. Y. Khan, M. Younas, H. A. Saeed, Printing Parameter Optimization of Additive Manufactured PLA Using Taguchi Method, Polymers, 15 (2023) 4370. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym15224370
  26. M. Baraheni, M. R. Shabgard, A. M. Tabatabaee, Effects of FDM 3D Printing Parameters on PLA Biomaterial Components Dimensional Accuracy and Surface Quality, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, 238 (2024) 3864–3873. https://doi.org/10.1177/09544062231202142
  27. R. De Santis, T. Russo, J. V. Rau, I. Papallo, M. Martorelli, A. Gloria, Design of 3D Additively Manufactured Hybrid Structures for Cranioplasty, Materials, 14 (2021) 181. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14010181
  28. R. Mantecón, M. Marco, A. Muñoz-Sanchez, G. Youssef, J. Díaz-Álvarez, H. Miguélez, Additive Manufacturing and Mechanical Characterization of PLA-Based Skull Surrogates, Polymers, 15 (2023) 58. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym15010058
  29. C. Bennett, P. Sojithamporn, W. Thanakulwattana, W. Wattanutchariya, K. Leksakul, W. Nakkiew, K. Jantanasakulwong, P. Rachtanapun, J. Suhr, C. Sawangrat, Optimization of 3D Printing Technology for Fabrication of Dental Crown Prototype Using Plastic Powder and Zirconia Materials, Materials, 15 (2022) 8618. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15238618
  30. K. Zgodavová, K. Lengyelová, P. Bober, J. A. Eguren, A. Moreno, 3D Printing Optimization for Environmental Sustainability: Experimenting with Materials of Protective Face Shield Frames, Materials, 14 (2021) 6595. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14216595
  31. N. Layeb, N. Barhoumi, I. Oldal, I. Keppler, Improving the Strength Properties of PLA Acetabular Liners by Optimizing FDM 3D Printing: Taguchi Approach and Finite Element Analysis Validation, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Tech., 137 (2025) 2649–2664. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-025-15314-3
  32. K. Kalaithendral, S. Karuppudaiyan, S. Roy, Design and Analysis of Multi-Material Structures of 3D Printed Implants of Mandible, Biomed. Phys. Eng. Express, 9 (2023) 065020. https://doi.org/10.1088/2057-1976/ad004f
  33. S. Javed, M. H. Sultan, M. I. Alam, D. Sivadasan, W. Ahsan, A. Jabeen, M. H. A. Jaafari, M. H. A. Hawthan, A. H. Byti, Application of Box–Behnken Design in the Optimization and Preparation of Salicylic Acid Nanopowder Using Solvent-Free Green Mechanochemical Approach, J. Pharm. Bioallied Sci., 15 (2023) 29–34. https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_577_22
Statistics
Article View: 36
PDF Download: 37


Journal Management System. Powered by iJournalPro.com