The influence of fused deposition modeling (FDM) process parameters on the Charpy impact strength of short carbon fiber-reinforced nylon (PAHT-CF) was investigated using machine learning (ML). A total of 129 specimens were fabricated by varying five key parameters: extrusion temperature, bed temperature, printing speed, layer thickness, and printing orientation. The impact strength of the samples was tested according to ISO 179. Nine ML regression models were developed and hyperparameter-optimized via grid search, randomized search, and Bayesian optimization. The coefficient of determination R2 scores and the mean square error (MSE) values from the five-fold cross-validation were used to assess the performance of the hyperparameter settings. The prediction performance of the ML models was evaluated and compared using R2, MSE, root mean square error (RMSE), and mean absolute error (MAE). The decision tree model tuned with Bayesian optimization yielded the best predictive accuracy (R2 = 0.884; lowest MSE, RMSE, and MAE). SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis identified printing orientation as the dominant factor affecting impact strength across all models, while nonlinear ML models effectively captured synergistic interactions among process parameters. This work demonstrates the potential of interpretable ML for predicting and explaining the mechanical properties of high-performance thermoplastic composites fabricated via FDM.
LuoMHuangSManZ, et al.Tribological behaviour of fused deposition modelling printed short carbon fiber reinforced nylon composites with surface textures under dry and water lubricated conditions. Friction2022; 10(12): 2045–2058.
2.
WickramasingheSDoTTranP. FDM-Based 3D printing of polymer and associated composite: a review on mechanical properties, defects and treatments. Polymers2020; 12(7): 1529.
3.
Cano-VicentATambuwalaMMHassanSS, et al.Fused deposition modelling: current status, methodology, applications and future prospects. Addit Manuf2021; 47: 102378.
4.
AlafaghaniAAQattawiAAlrawiB, et al.Experimental optimization of fused deposition modelling processing parameters: a design-for-manufacturing approach. Procedia Manuf2017; 10: 791–803.
5.
AbasMAwadhMAHabibT, et al.Analyzing surface roughness variations in material extrusion additive manufacturing of nylon carbon fiber composites. Polymers2023; 15(17): 3633.
6.
Gómez-OrtegaAPiedraSMondragón-RodríguezGC, et al.Dependence of the mechanical properties of nylon-carbon fiber composite on the FDM printing parameters. Composer Part A Appl Sci Manuf2024; 186: 108419.
7.
García-LeónRARodríguez-CastillaMQuintero-QuinteroW. Experimental analysis of impact resistance of 3D polycarbonate and nylon+ carbon fiber specimens. J Mater Eng Perform2021; 30(7): 4837–4847.
8.
YuJWangZLiuY, et al.Machine learning prediction of microhardness and corrosion current density of Ni–Co alloys produced by scanning jet electrodeposition. Trans IMF2025; 103(1): 33–41.
9.
Al-TamimiAAMuhamedagicKBegic–HajdarevicD, et al.Experimental investigation and prediction of the flexural properties of FDM printed carbon fiber reinforced polyamide parts using optimized RSM and ANN models. PLoS One2025; 20(5): e0322628.
10.
DeokarSKumarNSinghRP. A comprehensive review on smart manufacturing using machine learning applicable to fused deposition modeling. Results Eng2025; 26: 104941.
11.
BorahJChandrasekaranM. Application of machine learning-based approach to predict and optimize mechanical properties of additively manufactured polyether ether ketone biopolymer using fused deposition modeling. J Mater Eng Perform2025; 34: 19233–19249.
12.
BorahJChandrasekaranM. Predictive modeling and optimization of rockwell hardness of additively manufactured PEEK using RSM, ANFIS and RNN integrated with PSO. Phys Scripta2024; 99(8): 086006.
13.
NasrinTPouraliMPourkamali-AnarakiF, et al.Active learning for prediction of tensile properties for material extrusion additive manufacturing. Sci Rep2023; 13(1): 11460.
14.
El Youbi El IdrissiMALaaouinaLJeghalA, et al.Modeling of energy consumption and print time for FDM 3D printing using multilayer perceptron network. J Manuf Mater Process2023; 7(4): 128.
15.
FarozeFSrivastavaVBatishA. Modelling and prediction of mechanical properties of FFF-Printed polycarbonate parts using ML and DA hybrid approach. Colloid Polym Sci2024; 302(12): 1891–1909.
16.
RadhakrishnanLRajendranPBiswalR, et al.Machine learning approach to predict feature dimensions for fused deposition modelling. Trans Indian Inst Met2023; 76(2): 315–321.
17.
ÖzkülMKuncanFUlkirO. Predicting mechanical properties of FDM-Produced parts using machine learning approaches. J Appl Polym Sci2025; 142(20): e56899.
18.
KumarMKumarRKumarR. Material extrusion-based additive manufacturing of sandwiched acrylonitrile butadiene styrene/glass fibers composites: machine learning approach to model tensile stress. Polym Compos2024; 45(16): 15100–15112.
19.
BorahJChandrasekaranM. Development of ANN model for predicting mechanical properties of 3D printed PEEK polymer using FDM and optimization of process parameters for better mechanical properties. Phys Scripta2024; 99(11): 116005.
20.
VeemanDVellaisamyMPonnusamyPC, et al.Influence of optimization techniques on machine learning algorithms: compressive behaviour of additively manufactured poly lactic acid (PLA) for structural applications. Progr Addit Manuf2025; 10(4): 2613–2630.
21.
HuangMJinSTangZ, et al.A method for predicting surface finish of polylactic acid parts printed using fused deposition modeling. Processes2023; 11(6): 1820.
22.
HauckSGreifLBennerN, et al.Advancing sustainable additive manufacturing: analyzing parameter influences and machine learning approaches for CO2 prediction. Sustainability2025; 17(9): 3804.
23.
NikzadMHHeidari-RaraniMRastiR, et al.Machine learning-driven prediction of tensile strength in 3D-printed PLA parts. Expert Syst Appl2025; 264: 125836.
24.
KharateNAneraoPKulkarniA, et al.Explainable AI techniques for comprehensive analysis of the relationship between process parameters and material properties in FDM-Based 3D-printed biocomposites. J Manuf Mater Process2024; 8(4): 171.
25.
SeyedzavvarMBoğaCSoudmandBH. Comparative performance analysis of optimization algorithms for hyperparameter tuning in LSBoost modeling of mechanical properties in FDM-Printed nanocomposites. Expert Syst Appl2025; 287: 128111.
26.
PazhamannilRVGovindanPSoorajP. Prediction of the tensile strength of polylactic acid fused deposition models using artificial neural network technique. Mater Today Proc2021; 46: 9187–9193.
27.
PapaIMancoEEpastoG, et al.Impact behaviour and non destructive evaluation of 3D printed reinforced composites. Compos Struct2022; 281: 115112.
28.
AhmedHHussainGGoharS, et al.Impact toughness of hybrid carbon fiber-PLA/ABS laminar composite produced through fused filament fabrication. Polymers2021; 13: 3057.
29.
RizweeMKumarD. Optimizing mechanical behaviour of polylactic acid (PLA) specimen in fused deposition modeling (FDM): a taguchi approach. Prog Rubber Plast Recycl Technol. 2026; 42(1): 62–83.
30.
PanicoACorviAColliniL, et al.Multi objective optimization of FDM 3D printing parameters set via design of experiments and machine learning algorithms. Sci Rep2025; 15(1): 16753.
31.
ZhuJSuZWangQ, et al.Surface quality prediction and quantitative evaluation of process parameter effects for 3D printing with transfer learning-enhanced gradient-boosting decision trees. Expert Syst Appl2024; 237: 121478.
32.
FangQYuJShiB. Modelling and optimisation of FDM-Printed short carbon fiber-reinforced nylon using CCF and RSM. Polymers2025; 17(13): 1872.
33.
KumarBRHussainSOngKJ, et al.Feature-driven density prediction of maraging steel additively manufactured samples using pyrometer sensor and supervised machine learning. IEEE Access2024; 12: 172892–172909.
34.
ZhangZBaiYHeY, et al.Using RSM optimization to fabricate Ni–Fe–P ternary alloy electroless coating and explore its corrosion properties. J Mater Sci Mater Electron2021; 32(22): 26412–26424.
35.
DeshmukhVKRajputMSNarangHK. An IQR integrated fuzzy model for prediction of geometrical characteristics of electrodeposited feature manufactured by ultrasonic assisted jet electrodeposition. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng2024; 46(1): 2.
36.
CelisseAMary-HuardT. Theoretical analysis of cross-validation for estimating the risk of the k-nearest neighbor classifier. J Mach Learn Res2018; 19(58): 1–54.
37.
RynkiewiczJ. General bound of overfitting for MLP regression models. Neurocomputing2012; 90: 106–110.
38.
AkbariPZamaniMMostafaeiA. Machine learning prediction of mechanical properties in metal additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf2024; 91: 104320.
39.
AckermannMHaaseC. Machine learning-based identification of interpretable process-structure linkages in metal additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf2023; 71: 103585.
40.
BelliniBGüçeriS. Mechanical characterization of parts fabricated using fused deposition modeling. Rapid Prototyp J2003; 9(4): 252–264.
41.
AbbottACTandonGPBradfordRL, et al.Process-structure-property effects on ABS bond strength in fused filament fabrication. Addit Manuf2018; 19: 29–38.
42.
ChenTGuestrinC. XGBoost: a scalable tree boosting system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, San Francisco, CA, USA, 13–17 Aug 2016.
43.
KechagiasJDVidakisNPetousisM, et al.A multi-parametric process evaluation of the mechanical response of PLA in FFF 3D printing. Mater Manuf Process2023; 38(8): 941–953.
44.
RajpurohitSRDaveHK. Flexural strength of fused filament fabricated (FFF) PLA parts on an open-source 3D printer. Adv Manuf2018; 6(4): 430–441.
45.
HartomacioğluS. Optimization of production parameters for impact strength of 3D-printed carbon/glass fiber-reinforced nylon composite in critical ZX printing orientation. Polymers2024; 16(21): 3006.
46.
FangWZhouJLiX, et al.Unpack local model interpretation for gbdt. International Conference on Database Systems for Advanced Applications. Springer International Publishing, 2018, pp. 764–775.
47.
LiuFChenZXuJ, et al.Interpretable machine learning-based influence factor identification for 3D printing process–structure linkages. Polymers2024; 16(18): 2680.
48.
LundbergSMErionGGLeeSI. Consistent individualized feature attribution for tree ensembles. arXiv [Preprint]. 2018.
49.
HuangBMengSHeH, et al.Study of processing parameters in fused deposition modeling based on mechanical properties of acrylonitrile‐butadiene‐styrene filament. Polym Eng Sci2019; 59(1): 120–128.
50.
BeattieNBockNAndersonT, et al.Effects of build orientation on mechanical properties of fused deposition modeling parts. J Mater Eng Perform2021; 30(7): 5059–5065.
51.
CostaSFDuarteFMCovasJA. Estimation of filament temperature and adhesion development in fused deposition techniques. J Mater Process Technol2017; 245: 167–179.
52.
SunQRizviGMBellehumeurCT, et al.Effect of processing conditions on the bonding quality of FDM polymer filaments. Rapid Prototyp J2008; 14(2): 72–80.
53.
DingQLiXZhangD, et al.Anisotropy of poly(lactic acid) carbon fiber composites prepared by fused deposition modeling. J Appl Polym Sci2019; 137(23): 48786.
54.
XuCChengKLiuY, et al.Effect of processing parameters on flexural properties of 3D-printed polyetherketoneketone using fused deposition modeling. Polym Eng Sci2021; 61(2): 465–476.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
