Cited by 14Additive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesAir Quality and Health ImpactsAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Influence of Powder Type on Aerosol Emissions in Powder-Binder Jetting with Emphasis on Lunar Regolith for In Situ Space Applications

Hayes, Austin C., Osio-Norgaard, Jorge, Miller, Shelly, Vance, Marina E., Whiting, Gregory L.·2021·ACS ES&T Engineering

Abstract

Abstract Powder-binder jetting is an additive process with applications for manufacturing complex geometric structures, such as lightweighting, mold making, and in situ resource utilization (ISRU) for space applications. With this technique, a powder feedstock is spread across a bed during which aerosol may be released leading to human health implications. This study characterizes airborne powder emissions for three powders of varying particle diameters and composition: Hydroperm gypsum plaster, Lunar Highland Simulant regolith (LHS-1, a lunar soil simulant), and Zeolite 13X (a molecular sieve). Bulk powder D50 values were 22 μm for Hydroperm, 304 μm for LHS-1, and 3.85 μm for Zeolite. Total particle emission rates were (5.4 ± 0.96) × 105 min–1 for Hydroperm, (1.0 ± 0.28) × 106 min–1 for Zeolite, and (2.2 ± 0.82) × 107 min–1 for LHS-1. An emission factor was developed normalized to the volume of powder spread resulting in emission factors of 2.8 ± 0.85 min–1 mm–3 for Hydroperm, 220 ± 72 min–1 mm–3 for LHS-1, and 5.0 ± 0.24 min–1 mm–3 for Zeolite. This indicates that particle emissions from powder-binder jetting machines with a constant spreading mechanism can vary widely depending solely on powder type. In the experimental enclosure where testing took place, LHS-1 PM10 concentrations exceeded 8 h TWA PEL OSHA standards for crystalline silica by sixfold, indicating that air quality should be a strong design consideration for 3D printing for lunar ISRU. With lower gravitational settling effects, Lunar particulate concentrations 20 m away from the printer were modeled to be 330% higher than on Earth. This study suggests that powder size, morphology, and composition should be considered holistically when determining emission concerns for new powders in powder-binder jetting. This study also suggests particular attention should be paid to aerosol emissions in a Lunar environment.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acsestengg.0c00045

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Given Lunar microgravity, particulate concentrations at 20 m from the printer can be up to 330% higher compared to Earth conditions.

    “Given the Lunar microgravity environment, their study predicted that particulate concentrations at a distance of 20 m from the printer can be up to 330 % higher compared to Earth conditions.”
  • Hayes et al. found variations in particle emissions during binder jetting primarily depend on the type of powder used.

    “Their findings indicated that variations in particle emissions during the binder jetting process primarily depend on the type of powder used, emphasizing the importance of considering air quality as a design factor for printing processes.”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 30 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Edmunson, 2010, NASA Lunar Regolith Simulant Program. Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 1786
  2. SigmaAldrich. Molecular Sieves - Technical Information Bulletin. 2020. https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/chemistry/chemical-synthesis/learning-center/technical-bulletins/al-1430/molecular-sieves.html (accessed 2020-09-03).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Hayes, A. C., Osio-Norgaard, J., Miller, S., Vance, M. E., & Whiting, G. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Colorado Boulder (US)
  • University of Colorado Boulder , , , ,
Corresponding author
  • Vance, Marina E.
  • Whiting, Gregory L.
Venue
ACS ES&T Engineering
Published
2020-10-05
Volume
1
Issue
2
Pages
183-191
ISSN
2690-0645 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3092649147
Cited by
14
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2
FWCI
0.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • ACS ES&T Engineering (publishedVersion)
  • CU Scholar (University of Colorado Boulder) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Colorado Boulder
  • National Science Foundation (DGE 1650115)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Additive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Air Quality and Health Impacts
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Keywords
aerosol emissions, lunar regolith simulant, in-situ resource utilization, particle emission rate, emission factors, PM10, crystalline silica exposure, gypsum plaster, zeolite 13X, powder particle size

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