A benchmark study on rapid prototyping processes and machines: Quantitative comparisons of mechanical properties, accuracy, roughness, speed, and material cost

By Gi-Dae Kim, Y. Oh. 2008

257 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A Review of Additive Manufacturing (2012, background): “Figure 11: Tensile strength of various 3D printing processes adapted from [16].”
Additive Manufacturing of Optically Transparent Glass (2015, unknown): “This level of anisotropy is in line with what has been observed in plastic printed parts in other studies.(33)”
Perspective on 3D printing of separation membranes and comparison to related unconventional fabrication techniques (2017, background): “However, unused material cannot be completely reclaimed and waste is generated with each build [47].”
Standardization in additive manufacturing: activities carried out by international organizations and projects (2015, methodology): “Kim [15] quantified and compared several characteristics of processes using representative apparatus and various materials.”
Additive manufacturing-enabled design theory and methodology: a critical review (2015, methodology): “In benchmark tests [58–60],mechanical properties such as tensile and compressive strengths, hardness, impact strength, heat resistance, surface roughness, geometric and dimensional accuracy, manufacturing speed, and material costs were compared for different types of AM process.”