Rheological properties of gelatine hydrogels affected by flow- and horizontally-induced cooling rates during 3D cryo-printing

Extraction and Characterization of Gelatin from Skin By-Products of Seabream, Seabass and Rainbow Trout Reared in Aquaculture

“…The gelling process can be attributed to the physical crosslinking of single chains (connecting regions or interactions, including hydrogen bonds, ionic interactions, van der Waals forces, self-assembly, and hydrophobic associations). The gelation temperatures of all gelatin samples were in the range of 19.5 to 20 • C, which is similar to the typical gelling point range of fish gelatin [35].…”

“…For the three gelatin hydrogels, the complex viscosity increases with decreasing temperature (cooling ramp) and decreases again with increasing temperature (heating ramp). Generally speaking, a higher viscosity helps to maintain the integrity of the gel formulation, and the SOL-GEL transition below the critical gel temperature makes it more suitable for preparing more complex structures with good shape printability [35].…”

Reinforcement of Alginate-Gelatin Hydrogels with Bioceramics for Biomedical Applications: A Comparative Study

“…In addition, it is important to mention that 3D printing is crucial to develop a layer-by-layer system that can be used as a method of biofabrication, as cells could potentially could be extruded for 2D and 3D culture systems, in comparison with less robust methodologies as molding that lacks the complexity for crucial biomedical applications. Due to the deposition onto the substrate, a decrease in the shear rate caused a sharp increase in viscosity resulting in thinning materials and shape fidelity 44 , as is shown in Figure 4C,E,H). In addition, some structures collapsed during the additive process due to the low viscosity of the hydrogel solution (Figure 4F,G).…”

“…Due to the deposition onto the substrate, a decrease in the shear rate caused a sharp increase in viscosity resulting in thinning materials and shape fidelity [ 44 ], as is shown in Figure 4 C,E,H). In addition, some structures collapsed during the additive process due to the low viscosity of the hydrogel solution ( Figure 4 F,G).…”

“…Considering these measurements, AG3 presented the most accurate structure due to the smallest particle size of the Na 2 Ti 6 O 1 3 , where surface areas on the top (135.06 mm 2 ) and the bottom (214.28 mm 2 ) were the closest to the theoretical surface area. On the other hand, AG6 presented the highest surface area difference between the top (173.72 mm 2 ) and the bottom (270.97 mm 2 ) due to the weight of the previous layers and the low viscosity of the hydrogel solution [ 44 , 45 ]. Consistency obtained in all samples was achieved by using optimal processing parameters and a pre-cross-linking solution where a mean of 36% and standard deviation of 6.57% in the difference of top and bottom surface areas were obtained.…”