Scaffolds for bone tissue engineering are porous structures that serve as support for cellular growth and, therefore, new tissue formation. The present work assessed the influence of the porous architecture of triply periodic minimal surface (TPMS) scaffolds on their macroscopic permeability behavior, combining numerical and experimental methods. The TPMS scaffolds considered were Schwartz D, Schwartz P, and Gyroid, which have been previously studied for bone tissue engineering, with 70% porosity. On the experimental side, these scaffolds were produced by MultiJet 3D printing and tested for fluid passage to calculate their permeability through Darcy’s Law. On the numerical side, finite element (FE) models of the scaffolds were simulated on ABAQUS^® for fluid passage under compression to assess potential fluid concentration spots. The outcomes revealed that the design of the unit cell had a noticeable effect on both calculated permeability and FE computed fluid flow velocity, regardless of the identical porosity, with the Gyroid scaffold having higher permeability and the Schwartz P a lower probability of fluid trapping. Schwartz D had the worst outcomes in both testing modalities, so these scaffolds would most likely be the last choice for promoting cell differentiation onto bone cells. Gyroid and Schwartz P would be up for selection depending on the application and targeted bone tissue.

In the name of the authors of the paper “Permeability versus Design in TPMS Scaffolds”, published in Materials in 2019 and already counting six citations in Google Scholar to date, I would like to formally respond to the comment manuscript now entitled “Assessing Porous Media Permeability in Non-Darcy Flow: A Re-Evaluation Based on the Forchheimer Equation”