CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 88Environmental Impact and SustainabilityAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesSustainable Supply Chain Management

Toward a Sustainable Impeller Production: Environmental Impact Comparison of Different Impeller Manufacturing Methods

Open access
Peng, Shitong, Li, Tao, Wang, Xinlin, Dong, Mengmeng, Liu, Zhichao, Shi, Junli, Zhang, Hongchao·2017·Journal of Industrial Ecology
DOI 10.1111/jiec.12628
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Summary: Impellers are the core components of turbomachinery in petrochemical and aeronautical engineering. In addition to conventional manufacturing (CM), additive manufacturing (AM) and remanufacturing (RM) can also be used in impeller production. This article presents a life cycle assessment method comparing the environmental impacts of different impeller manufacturing methods, including plunge milling (CM), laser cladding forming (AM combined with CM), and additive remanufacturing (RM). Results show that RM is the most environmentally favorable option, followed by AM and CM, in terms of global warming potential (GWP), Chinese resource depletion potential (CADP), water eutrophication potential (EP), and acidification potential. However, AM is not always more environmentally friendly than CM. The comparison of impeller production by CM and pure AM, in this case, indicates that the environmental burden of production using pure AM is approximately twice than that of CM. Compared with CM, the RM of impellers would reduce GWP, CADP, and EP by 64.7%, 66.1%, and 75.4%, respectively. The results of this study contribute to a scientific basis for the selection of manufacturing methods and the sustainable manufacturing of impeller production enterprises.

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 · 10.1111/jiec.12628

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?

  • The application of additive manufacturing has demonstrated enhancements in efficiency and effectiveness in impellers and is recognized as an efficient method for producing components that are challenging to machine.

    “The application of additive manufacturing has demonstrated enhancements in efficiency and effectiveness in impellers and is recognized as an efficient method for producing components that are challenging to machine [51].”

    From Towards Sustainability in Hydraulic Machinery Manufacturing by 3D Printing (2024) · cites this paper as [51]

    The 'Additive Manufacturing for Impellers' section calls AM an efficient way to produce complicated or difficult-to-machine components. The 'Implications for Additive Manufacturing' section finds an environmental advantage for the studied impeller, but specifies that it was made by a hybrid additive–conventional process; it does not establish improved impeller effectiveness or a general efficiency gain for wholly additive production. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 47

  1. Baumers, M., C. Tuck, D. Bourell, R. Sreenivasan, and R. Hague. 2011. Sustainability of additive manufacturing: Measuring the energy consumption of the laser sintering process. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture 225(12): 2228-2239.
  2. Baumers, M., C. Tuck, R. Hague, I. Ashcroft, and R. Wildman. 2010. A comparative study of metallic additive manufacturing power con- sumption. In Proceedings of the 2010 Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, 9-11 August, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
  3. Baumers, M., C. Tuck, R. Wildman, I. Ashcroft, E. Rosamond, and R. Hague. 2013. Transparency built-in: Energy consumption and cost estimation for additive manufacturing. Journal of Industrial Ecology 17(3): 418-431.
  4. Biswas, W. and M. Rosano. 2011. A life cycle greenhouse gas assessment of remanufactured refrigeration and air conditioning compressor. International Journal of Sustainable Manufacturing 2(2-3): 222-236.
  5. Calleja, A., I. Tabernero, J. A. Ealo, F. J. Campa, A. Lamikiz, and L. N. L. de Lacalle. 2014. Feed rate calculation algorithm for the homogeneous material deposition of blisk blades by 5-axis laser cladding. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 74(9-12): 1219-1228.
  6. Chen, J. X. 1994. Data manual of common diagrams for steel-making. [Article in Chinese]. Beijing: Metallurgical Industry Press.
  7. Chuang, L. and H. Young. 2007. Integrated rough machining method- ology for centrifugal impeller manufacturing. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 34(11-12): 1062- 1071.
  8. Debnath, S., M. M. Reddy, and Q. S. Yi. 2014. Environmental friendly cutting fluids and cooling techniques in machining: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production 83: 33-47.
  9. Ekvall, T. and A. M. Tillman. 1997. Open-loop recycling: Criteria for allocation procedures. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2(3): 155-162.
  10. Fernández, S., M. Jiménez, J. Porras, L. Romero, M. D. M. Espinosa, and M. Domínguez. 2015. Additive manufacturing and perfor- mance of functional hydraulic pump impellers in fused deposi- tion modeling technology. Journal of Mechanical Design 138(2): 1-4.
  11. Frazier, W. E. 2014. Metal additive manufacturing: A review. Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance 23(6): 1917-1928.
  12. Gibson, I., D. W. Rosen, and B. Stucker. 2015. Additive manufacturing technologies: 3D printing, rapid prototyping, and direct digital manu- facturing. New York: Springer Science+Business Media.
  13. Gutowski, T. G., M. S. Branham, J. B. Dahmus, A. J. Jones, A. Thiriez, and D. P. Sekulic. 2009. Thermodynamic analysis of resources used in manufacturing processes. Environmental Science & Tech- nology 43(5): 1584-1590.
  14. Han, F. Y., D. H. Zhang, M. Luo, and B. H. Wu. 2015. An approach to optimize the tilt angle of indexable table for nonorthogonal four-axis milling of impeller. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 76(9-12): 1893-1904.
  15. Han, F. Y., D. H. Zhang, M. Luo, and B. H. Wu. 2014. Optimal CNC plunge cutter selection and tool path generation for multi-axis roughing free-form surface impeller channel. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 71(9-12): 1801- 1810.
  16. Huang, R., M. Riddle, D. Graziano, J. Warren, S. Das, S. Nimbalkar, J. Cresko, and E. Masanet. 2015. Energy and emissions saving po- tential of additive manufacturing: The case of lightweight aircraft components. Journal of Cleaner Production 135: 1559-1570.
  17. Huang, S. H., P. Liu, A. Mokasdar, and L. Hou. 2013. Additive man- ufacturing and its societal impact: A literature review. The Inter- national Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 67(5-8): 1191-1203.
  18. Ijomah, W. L., C. A. McMahon, G. P. Hammond, and S. T. New- man. 2007. Development of design for remanufacturing guidelines to support sustainable manufacturing. Robotics and Computer- Integrated Manufacturing 23(6): 712-719.
  19. Jiang, Z., F. Zhou, H. Zhang, Y. Wang, and J. W. Sutherland. 2015. Op- timization of machining parameters considering minimum cutting fluid consumption. Journal of Cleaner Production 108: 183-191.
  20. Klöpffer, W. 1996. Allocation rule for open-loop in life cycle assessment-A review. The International Journal of Life Cycle As- sessment 1(1): 27-31.
  21. Klöpffer, W. 2014. Introducing life cycle assessment and its presenta- tion in 'LCA Compendium'. In Background and future prospects in life cycle assessment, edited by W. Klöpffer and M. A. Curran. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
  22. Li, T., L. L. Kong, H. C. Zhang, and I. Asif. 2014. Recent research and development of typical cutting machine tool's energy consump- tion model. [Article in Chinese]. Journal of Mechanical Engineering 50(7): 102-111.
  23. Li, T., Z. Liu, H. Zhang, and Q. Jiang. 2013. Environmental emissions and energy consumptions assessment of a diesel engine from the life cycle perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production 53: 7-12.
  24. Liu, N., Y. F. Zhang, and W. F. Lu. 2015. A hybrid approach to energy consumption modelling based on cutting power: A milling case. Journal of Cleaner Production 104: 264-272.
  25. Liu, Z., T. Li, Q. Jiang, and H. Zhang. 2014. Life cycle assessment- based comparative evaluation of originally manufactured and re- manufactured diesel engines. Journal of Industrial Ecology 18(4): 567-576.
  26. Luo, K. Y., X. Jing, J. Sheng, G. F. Sun, Z. Yan, and J. Z. Lu. 2016. Characterization and analyses on micro-hardness, residual stress and microstructure in laser cladding coating of 316L stainless steel subjected to massive LSP treatment. Journal of Alloys and Compounds 673: 158-169.
  27. Luo, Y. C., Z. Ji, C. Ming, and R. Caudill. 1999. Environmental per- formance analysis of solid freeform fabrication processes. In Pro- ceedings of the 7th IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, 11-13 May, Danvers, MA, USA.
  28. Morrow, W. R., H. Qi, I. Kim, J. Mazumder, and S. J. Skerlos. 2007. Environmental aspects of laser-based and conventional tool and die manufacturing. Journal of Cleaner Production 15(10): 932- 943.
  29. Pusavec, F., P. Krajnik, and J. Kopac. 2010. Transitioning to sustain- able production-Part I: Application on machining technologies. Journal of Cleaner Production 18(2): 174-184.
  30. Rajemi, M. F., P. T. Mativenga, and A. Aramcharoen. 2010. Sustain- able machining: Selection of optimum turning conditions based on minimum energy considerations. Journal of Cleaner Production 18(10-11): 1059-1065.
  31. Ren, J., B. Liu, C. F. Yao, K. Shi, Y. S. Liang, and Y. F. Luo. 2010. Research on plunge milling process parameters optimization for TC11 titanium alloy. [Article in Chinese]. Mechanical Science and Technology for Aerospace Engineering 29(5): 634-637.
  32. Serres, N., D. Tidu, S. Sankare, and F. Hlawka. 2011. Environmental comparison of MESO-CLAD R process and conventional ma- chining implementing life cycle assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production 19(9-10): 1117-1124.
  33. Shen, L., E. Worrell, and M. K. Patel. 2010. Open-loop recycling: A LCA case study of PET bottle-to-fibre recycling. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 55(1): 34-52.
  34. Shi, J, T. Li, S. Peng, Z. Liu, H. Zhang, and Q. Jiang. 2015. Comparative life cycle assessment of remanufactured liquefied natural gas and diesel engines in China. Journal of Cleaner Production 101: 129- 136.
  35. Sreenivasan, R. and D. Bourell. 2009. Sustainability study in selec- tive laser sintering-An energy perspective. In The 20th Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, 3-5 August, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
  36. Warsen, J., M. Laumer, and W. Momberg. 2011. Comparative life cycle assessment of remanufacturing and new manufacturing of a man- ual transmission. In Proceedings of the 18th CIRP International Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Technische Universitat Braunschweig, 2-4 May, Braunschweig, Germany.
  37. Wilson, J. M., C. Piya, Y. C. Shin, F. Zhao, and K. Ramani. 2014. Remanufacturing of turbine blades by laser direct deposition with its energy and environmental impact analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production 80: 170-178.
  38. Wong, K. V. and A. Hernandez. 2012. A review of additive manufac- turing. ISRN Mechanical Engineering 2012: 1-10.
  39. Yan, X. and Y. Fang. 2015. CO 2 emissions and mitigation potential of the Chinese manufacturing industry. Journal of Cleaner Production 103: 759-773.
  40. Yang, S. and Y. F. Zhao. 2015. Additive manufacturing-enabled de- sign theory and methodology: A critical review. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 80(1-4): 327-342.
  41. Young, H. T. and L. C. Chuang. 2003. An integrated machining ap- proach for a centrifugal impeller. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 21: 556-563.
  42. Yoon, H., J. Lee, H. Kim, M. Kim, E. Kim, Y. Shin, W. Chu, and S. Ahn. 2014. A comparison of energy consumption in bulk forming, subtractive, and additive processes: Review and case study. Inter- national Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology 1(3): 261-279.
  43. Zanghelini, G. M., E. Cherubini, P. Orsi, and S. R. Soares. 2014. Waste management life cycle assessment: The case of a recipro- cating air compressor in Brazil. Journal of Cleaner Production 70: 164174.
  44. Zeng, Q. 2012. Tool path planning and simulation in five-axis NC ma- chining of integral impeller. [Article in Chinese]. Master's thesis, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, China.
  45. Zhang, H. and K. R. Haapala. 2015. Integrating sustainable manufac- turing assessment into decision making for a production work cell. Journal of Cleaner Production 105: 52-63.
  46. Zhang, S., J. F. Li, and Y. W. Wang. 2012. Tool life and cutting forces in end milling Inconel 718 under dry and minimum quantity cooling lubrication cutting conditions. Journal of Cleaner Production 32: 81-87.
  47. Zhu, Q., F. Lujia, A. Mayyas, M. A. Omar, Y. Al-Hammadi, and S. Al Saleh. 2015. Production energy optimization using low dynamic programming, a decision support tool for sustainable manufactur- ing. Journal of Cleaner Production 105: 178-183.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Peng, S., Li, T., Wang, X., Dong, M., Liu, Z., Shi, J., & Zhang, H.
Affiliations
  • Dalian University of Technology (CN)
  • Texas Tech University (US)
Corresponding author
Li, Tao
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Industrial Ecology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2017-07-05
Volume
21
Issue
S1
ISSN
  • 1088-1980 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-9290
DOI
10.1111/jiec.12628
OpenAlex
W2732268205
Cited by
88
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5
FWCI
3.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Industrial Ecology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • ThinkTech (Texas Tech University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
National Basic Research Program of China (2011CB013406)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
Keywords
impeller, turbomachinery, additive manufacturing, remanufacturing, plunge milling, life cycle assessment, environmental impact, global warming potential, resource depletion, eutrophication, acidification, sustainable manufacturing

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