CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 32Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesManufacturing Process and Optimization

Investigating the ‘techno-eco-efficiency’ performance of pump impellers: metal 3D printing vs. CNC machining

Open access
Jayawardane, Heshan, Davies, Ian J., Gamage, J. R., John, Michele, Biswas, Wahidul K.·2022·The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology
DOI 10.1007/s00170-022-09748-2
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Abstract The economic, environmental, and social impacts caused by the extensive resource consumption and harmful emissions from the metal manufacturing industry should be lowered through innovative sustainable manufacturing strategies. This study aims to investigate the techno-eco-efficiency performance of metal 3D-printed parts in comparison with CNC-machined parts to determine the technical, economic, and environmental performance as a decision support tool for selecting the most techno-eco-efficient manufacturing method. In this study, a novel metal extrusion 3D printing technology has been used to create a centrifugal semi-open pump impeller in 316L stainless steel material. The technical feasibility of the impellers has been determined by evaluating the geometry, build material, mechanics, morphology, and functional performance of the impellers. The eco-efficiency performance of technically feasible impellers was evaluated through environmental life cycle assessment, life cycle costing, and portfolio analysis. This eco-efficiency analysis helped ascertain the cost-competitiveness and environmentally friendliness of the 3D-printed impellers by comparing it with the conventional impellers. The findings reveal that the AM impeller is eco-efficient mainly due to lower normalised environmental impacts (54.6%) compared to the SM impeller. The functional parts made by metal extrusion 3D printing are technically feasible, cost-effective, and environmentally friendly compared to the SM counterparts.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00170-022-09748-2

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In materials such as AISI316L, BMD technology proves eco-efficient, reducing environmental impacts by 54.6% compared to commercial alternatives.

    “In materials such as AISI316L, BMD technology proves eco-efficient, reducing environmental impacts by 54.6% compared to commercial alternatives [123].”

    From Towards Sustainability in Hydraulic Machinery Manufacturing by 3D Printing (2024) · cites this paper as [123]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 34

  1. Huang R et al (2016) Energy and emissions saving potential of additive manufacturing: the case of lightweight aircraft compo- nents. J Clean Prod 135(3):1559-1570. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2015. 04. 109 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Peng T, Kellens K, Tang R, Chen C, Chen G (2018) Sustainability of additive manufacturing: an overview on its energy demand and environmental impact. Add Manuf 21(5):694-704. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. addma. 2018. 04. 022 · DOI
  3. Peng S, Li T, Wang X, Dong M (2017) Toward a sustainable impeller production: environmental impact comparison of differ- ent impeller manufacturing methods. J Ind Ecol 21(S1):S216- S229. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ jiec. 12628 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Ingarao G, Priarone PC, Deng Y, Paraskevas D (2018) Environ- mental modelling of aluminium based components manufacturing routes: additive manufacturing versus machining versus forming. J Clean Prod 176(6):261-275. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2017. 12. 115 · DOI
  5. Priarone PC, Ingarao G (2017) Towards criteria for sustainable process selection: on the modelling of pure subtractive versus additive/subtractive integrated manufacturing approaches. J Clean Prod 144(16):57-68. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2016. 12. 165 · DOI
  6. Fatimah YA, Biswas W, Mazhar I, Islam MN (2013) Sustainable manufacturing for Indonesian small-and medium-sized enter- prises (SMEs): the case of remanufactured alternators. J Remanuf 3(1):6. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1186/ 2210-4690-3-6 · DOI
  7. Jayal AD, Badurdeen F, Dillon OW, Jawahir IS (2010) Sustain- able manufacturing: modeling and optimization challenges at the product, process and system levels. CIRP J Manuf Sci Technol 2(3):144-152. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. cirpj. 2010. 03. 006 · DOI
  8. Serres N, Tidu D, Sankare S, Hlawka F (2011) Environmental comparison of MESO-CLAD ® process and conventional machin- ing implementing life cycle assessment. J Clean Prod 19(9):1117- 1124. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2010. 12. 010 · DOI
  9. Galati M, Minetola P (2019) Analysis of density, roughness, and accuracy of the atomic diffusion additive manufacturing (ADAM) process for metal parts. Materials 12(24):4122. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ ma122 44122 · DOI
  10. Le VT, Paris H (2018) A life cycle assessment-based approach for evaluating the influence of total build height and batch size on the environmental performance of electron beam melting. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 98(1):275-288. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s00170-018-2264-7 · DOI
  11. Tang Y, Mak K, Zhao YF (2016) A framework to reduce product environmental impact through design optimization for additive manufacturing. J Clean Prod 137(15):1560-1572. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2016. 06. 037 · DOI
  12. Ma J, Harstvedt JD, Dunaway D, Bian L, Jaradat R (2018) An exploratory investigation of Additively Manufactured Product life cycle sustainability assessment. J Clean Prod 192(29):55- 70. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2018. 04. 249 · DOI
  13. Thompson Y, Gonzalez-Gutierrez J, Kukla C, Felfer P (2019) Fused filament fabrication, debinding and sintering as a low cost additive manufacturing method of 316L stainless steel. Addit Manuf 30:100861. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. addma. 2019. 100861 · DOI
  14. Le VT, Paris H, Mandil G (2017) Environmental impact assess- ment of an innovative strategy based on an additive and subtractive manufacturing combination. J Clean Prod 164:508-523. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2017. 06. 204 · DOI
  15. Faludi J, Baumers M, Maskery I, Hague R (2017) Environmental Impacts of selective laser melting: do printer, powder, or power dominate? J Ind Ecol 21(S1):S144-S156. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ jiec. 12528 · DOI
  16. Baumers M, Tuck C, Hague R, Ashcroft I, Wildman R (2010) A comparative study of metallic additive manufacturing power consumption. Solid Freeform Fabric Symp 2009:278-288. https:// doi. org/ 10. 26153/ tsw/ 15198 · DOI
  17. Lengauer W et al (2019) Fabrication and properties of extrusion- based 3D-printed hardmetal and cermet components. Int J Refract Metal Hard Mater 82:141-149. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. ijrmhm. 2019. 04. 011 · DOI
  18. Masood SH, Song WQ (2004) Development of new metal/poly- mer materials for rapid tooling using Fused deposition modelling. Mater Des 25(7):587-594. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. matdes. 2004. 02. 009 · DOI
  19. Jiang D, Ning F (2021) Additive manufacturing of 316L stainless steel by a printing-debinding-sintering method: effects of micro- structure on fatigue property. J Manuf Sci Eng 143(9):091007. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1115/1. 40501 90 · DOI
  20. Sadaf M, Bragaglia M, Nanni F (2021) A simple route for additive manufacturing of 316L stainless steel via Fused Filament Fabri- cation. J Manuf Process 67:141-150. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jmapro. 2021. 04. 055 · DOI
  21. Peng T, Wang Y, Zhu Y, Yang Y, Yang Y, Tang R (2020) Life cycle assessment of selective-laser-melting-produced hydraulic valve body with integrated design and manufacturing optimiza- tion: a cradle-to-gate study. Additive Manuf 36:101530. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. addma. 2020. 101530 · DOI
  22. Lindemann C, Jahnke U, Moi M, Koch R (2012) Analyzing product lifecycle costs for a better understanding of cost driv- ers in additive manufacturing. 23th Ann Int Solid Freeform Fab- ric Symp An Additive Manuf Conf. Austin Texas USA 6th-8th August. https:// doi. org/ 10. 26153/ tsw/ 15341 · DOI
  23. Bengtsson M, Kurdve M (2016) Machining equipment life cycle costing model with dynamic maintenance cost. Procedia CIRP 48:102-107. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. procir. 2016. 03. 110 · DOI
  24. Watson A, Belding J, Ellis BD (2020) Characterization of 17-4 PH processed via bound metal deposition (BMD). TMS 2020 149th Ann Meet Exhibit Suppl Proc. Springer, 205-216. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3-030-36296-6_ 19 · DOI
  25. Jayawardane H, Davies IJ, Leadbeater G, John M, Biswas WK (2021) 'Techno-eco-efficiency' performance of 3D printed impel- lers: an application of life cycle assessment. Int J Sustain Manuf 5(1):44-80. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1504/ ijsm. 2021. 116871 · DOI
  26. Pertuz AD, Díaz-Cardona S, González-Estrada OA (2020) Static and fatigue behaviour of continuous fibre reinforced thermo- plastic composites manufactured by fused deposition modelling technique. Int J Fatigue 130(19):105275. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. ijfat igue. 2019. 105275 · DOI
  27. Arceo A, Biswas WK, John M (2019) Eco-efficiency improve- ment of Western Australian remote area power supply. J Clean Prod 230(1):820-834. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2019. 05. 106 · DOI
  28. Saling P, Kicherer A, Dittrich-Krämer B et al (2002) Eco- efficiency analysis by basf: the method. Int J Life Cycle Assess 7(4):203-218. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ BF029 78875 · DOI
  29. Cheng K, Shao Y, Bodenhorst R, Jadva M (2017) Modeling and simulation of material removal rates and profile accuracy control in abrasive flow machining of the integrally bladed rotor blade and experimental perspectives. J Manuf Sci Eng 139(12). https:// doi. org/ 10. 1115/1. 40380 27 · DOI
  30. Shao Y, Adetoro OB, Cheng K (2021) Development of multiscale multiphysics-based modelling and simulations with the applica- tion to precision machining of aerofoil structures. Eng Comput 38(3):1330-1349. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1108/ EC-10-2019-0473 · DOI
  31. Gong H, Snelling D, Kardel K, Carrano A (2019) Comparison of stainless steel 316L parts made by FDM-and SLM-based additive manufacturing processes. JOM 71(3):880-885. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11837-018-3207-3 · DOI
  32. Cheah K, Lee L, Winoto S, Zhao Z (2007) Numerical flow simula- tion in a centrifugal pump at design and off-design conditions. Int J Rotating Mach 2007. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1155/ 2007/ 83641 · DOI
  33. Wang Z, Yang S, Huang Y, Fan C, Peng Z, Gao Z (2021) Micro- structure and fatigue damage of 316L stainless steel manufactured by selective laser melting (SLM). Materials 14(24):7544. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ ma142 47544 · DOI
  34. Santonen T, Stockmann-Juvala H, Zitting A (2010) Review on toxicity of stainless steel, Työterveyslaitos, 9522610399. [Online]. Available: https:// core. ac. uk/ downl oad/ pdf/ 84322 713. pdf. Accessed 12 Nov 2020

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jayawardane, H., Davies, I. J., Gamage, J. R., John, M., & Biswas, W. K.
Affiliations
  • Curtin University (AU)
  • University of Moratuwa (LK)
Corresponding author
Jayawardane, Heshan
ORCID
Venue
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2022-07-23
Volume
121
Issue
9-10
Pages
6811-6836
ISSN
  • 0268-3768 (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-3015
DOI
10.1007/s00170-022-09748-2
OpenAlex
W4286715781
Cited by
32
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 4
FWCI
1.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Curtin University of Technology
  • Curtin University
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Additive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Manufacturing Process and Optimization
Keywords
pump impellers, metal additive manufacturing, CNC machining, 316L stainless steel, centrifugal pump, eco-efficiency, life cycle assessment, life cycle cost analysis, portfolio analysis, sustainable manufacturing, additive manufacturing, cost competitiveness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review