Abstract
Plastics are used today in many areas of the automotive, aerospace and mechanical engineering industries due to their lightweight potential and ease of processing. Additive manufacturing is applied more and more frequently, as it offers a high degree of design freedom and eliminates the need for complex tools. However, the application of additively manufactured components made of plastics have so far been limited due to their comparatively low strength. For this reason, processes that offer additional reinforcement of the plastic matrix using fibers made of high-strength materials have been developed. However, these components represent a composite of different materials produced on the basis of fossil raw materials, which are difficult to recycle and generally not biodegradable.
Therefore, this paper will explore the potential for new composite materials whose matrix consists of a bio-based plastic. In this investigation, it is assumed that the matrix is reinforced with a fibrous material made of natural fiber to significantly increase the strength. This potential material should offer a lightweight yet strong structure and be biodegradable after use under controlled conditions. Therefore, the state of the art in the use of bio-based materials in 3D printing is first presented. In order to determine the economic boundary conditions, the growth potentials for bio-based materials are analyzed. Also, the recycling prospects for bio-based plastics will also be highlighted. The greenhouse gas emissions and land use to be expected when using bio-based materials are also estimated. Finally, the degradability of the composites is discussed.
You have full access to this open access chapter, Download conference paper PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
1 Introduction
Alongside metals and minerals, plastics are the most commonly used materials in additive manufacturing. The main advantages are their ease of processing, moderate material costs and low weight [1]. However, the areas of application for additively manufactured components made of plastics have so far been limited due to their comparatively low strength. For this reason, processes that offer additional reinforcement of the plastic matrix with short and long fibers made of high-strength materials (e.g. glass or carbon fibers) have been used for some time. Very high strengths can be achieved in particular by inserting long fibers made of carbon [2]. This makes it possible to additively manufacture highly resilient and at the same time lightweight components that are used, for example, in vehicle and aircraft construction. However, these components represent a composite of different materials produced on the basis of fossil raw materials, which is difficult to recycle and generally not biodegradable.
Therefore, the question arises as to how these conventional materials can be replaced by bio-based and biodegradable materials? In particular, it must be clarified which material properties the biomaterials can offer? In addition, it is of great interest which economic and ecological consequences the use of biomaterials has?
In this contribution, the potential of a new composite material is investigated, the matrix of which consists of a bio-based plastic. In this investigation, it is assumed that the matrix is reinforced with a fiber material made of natural fibers to significantly increase the strength. Both short and particularly long fibers can be used. The goal is to determine the technical, economic, and environmental potential for developing a bio-based composite material for additive manufacturing. This potential material should have a lightweight yet strong structure and be biodegradable after use under controlled conditions. In addition to the economic potential, the environmental impacts that may arise with the industrial use of bio-based materials will be investigated. In particular, land grabbing in subtropical and tropical wetlands and the associated reduction in biodiversity as well as competition with food cultivation are to be contrasted with the saving of fossil resources and the reduction of the greenhouse effect.
2 Investigation of Potential Composite Materials
Composites based on plastics and fibers open up great potentials, since the properties of the individual components can be surpassed in the composite of a plastic and a fiber. The fibers represent the load-bearing component embedded in the plastic [3]. The matrix material plays an important role in the composite by holding the fibers in place, transferring stresses between the fibers, protecting the fibers from adverse environmental conditions, preventing surface abrasion, and supporting the fibers under compressive loads [4]. The combination of Additive Manufacturing and fiber reinforcement opens up a new field of fiber-reinforced Additive Manufacturing (FRAM). The materials used in this process are shown in Fig. 1.
2.1 Matrix Materials
When selecting the matrix material, attention should be paid to compatibility with the reinforcing fibers. For thermal compatibility between matrix and fibers, it is important that the thermal expansion coefficients are relatively similar so that cracks or delamination between matrix and fibers do not occur during temperature fluctuations. A good bond between fiber and matrix is the basis for physical compatibility. Similarly, mechanical stress should not cause the two composite partners to separate. If the two materials do not react chemically, there is also chemical compatibility over a long period of time. This ensures that both materials retain their desired properties over the entire life of the component [4]. On the one hand, composites offer many possible combinations of different plastic and fiber materials, and on the other hand, material properties such as strength and stiffness can be specifically adjusted by the quantity, position, length and orientation of reinforcements fibers. The highest reinforcement is achieved when the fibers are continuous and run in the direction of the load (long fibers). Therefore, material properties can vary not only between components but also within a component [3].
2.2 Potential Reinforcement Materials
Basically, fibers used for reinforcement should be thin and flexible to allow easy insertion into the matrix material. In addition, they must also have high strength and elasticity in order to be able to compensate for the shortcomings of the matrix material. For many years, glass fibers and carbon fibers have been used for this purpose because they offer extremely high strength. In addition, natural fibers (NF) have also been incorporated for some years. These include both animal-based natural fibers (e.g. wool or silk) and plant-based fibers (e.g. kenaf, sisal, etc.), which are the focus of this contribution. Both types of NF offer some advantages over conventional fibers, such as low cost and good recyclability [5]. Natural fiber can also offer some advantages in processing, such as significantly reduced abrasion of nozzles in additive manufacturing. Possible disadvantages of natural fibers include limited strength and low melting point, as well as possible moisture absorption, which can limit processability [6]. To overcome the disadvantages, some treatment methods for natural fibers have already been developed. These include, for example, bleaching of the fibers to improve the mechanical properties [6, 7].
3 Additive Manufacturing Using Reinforcing Fibers (FRAM)
A high degree of flexibility in production is provided by Additive Manufacturing (AM). These processes are characterized by the fact that components are manufactured generatively in layers and directly without tools. This enables the individual design of components with a wide range of geometric complexity [4]. The fused filament method (FLM) has proven to be a particularly simple and robust process, which is also significantly more cost-effective than laser-based processes. In AM, conventional materials such as ABS or nylon are primarily used. In addition, bio-based materials such as PLA are also used, which can also be used as a matrix material in a composite material. The processing of continuous fibers within the FLM process is a new approach in AM, which has so far been used commercially primarily for the incorporation of conventional fibers. Different technologies are used, which differ mainly in how the strands of continuous fibers are impregnated and how these fibers are processed with the matrix materials [8]. Currently, the most common way to process short fibers with the FLM process is to incorporate the fibers into the filament of the matrix material. All axes of the 3D printer are driven by stepper motors. While the X and Y axes and thus also the print head move according to the paths calculated by the slicer software, the filament with the matrix material is feed in the nozzle, melted and deposited on the building platform. This builds up the component layer by layer. If a long fiber is to be processed in addition to the filament, another motor is used to convey the fiber. First a layer of plastic is extruded and then the fiber is laid over it in the desired orientation. [9].
4 Economic and Environmental Considerations
The total global market for composite plastics in 2021 was 12.1 million tons, almost back to the level of 2018 [10]. The share of thermoplastic composites is over 50%. The European market has a share of approx. 25%. The share of biodegradable bio-based plastics in the overall plastics market is still below 1% [12]. Production capacities for PLA are estimated to have tripled since 2016 [4]. At the same time, a market survey forecasts an 8-fold growth in ten years to over 9 billion USD in 2028 for the additive manufacturing market with fiber-reinforced plastics [13]. Both developments, as well as the existing use of bio-based PLA as a filament and of conventional glass and carbon fibers for AM with conventional plastics, indicate an enormously fast-growing market for bio-based and plant-fiber-reinforced plastics.
4.1 Matrix Materials
With an increasing market share, the production and life cycle of biodegradable bio-based plastics have been investigated for some time with regard to their environmental impact. PLA, which is already being additively processed, dominates as a plastic. The production routes from maize and sugar cane have been evaluated by Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) with regard to various environmental categories [14, 15]. The production of PLA from sugar cane with 2,334 gCO2/kg causes approx. 27% less GHG emissions than PET from fossil raw materials, which can also be additively processed, with 3,200 gCO2/kg. If the bound CO2 of 1,800 g/kg PLA is considered, the GHG emissions are approx. 84% lower. This contrasts with the significantly higher land use of 1,775 m2 per ton of PLA. This land use can be considered for on the basis of the annual storage capacity of forests of 10 t CO2/ha by a missing annual CO2 storage of 1,775 gCO2/kg PLA (see Fig. 2). For the disposal of biodegradable plastics, studies show that, similar to conventional plastics, mechanical recycling and incineration are preferable to composting or landfilling [16, 17]. Without accounting for land use, GHG emissions are lower for PLA than for PET in all three EOL scenarios: landfilling, power from WIP (Waste Incineration Plant) and heavy oil substitution in high temperature processes. When land use is considered, Fig. 2 shows that apart from mechanical recycling (not shown), only the addition of heavy oil substitutes in high-temperature processes is more climate-friendly than the landfilling of PET.
This is in contrast to the extremely low degradation rate of PET and the accumulation of microplastics in the environment during wild dumping. Considered for one year of product life cycle, the use of PLA instead of PET is always advantageous, except for the EOL scenario landfilling. Extrapolated to the annual global plastic consumption in glass fiber reinforced plastics of approx. 5 million tons, approx. 8,875Â km2 of arable land would be required in warm, humid regions. In return, 13.5 million tons of CO2 could be saved, which corresponds to the annual binding by approx. 13,500Â km2 of forest and significantly overcompensates for land use.
4.2 Fiber Materials
Similar to bio-based plastics, studies on life cycle assessments have primarily shown savings in fossil energy and greenhouse gas emissions and comparatively higher land use [18,19,20]. The production of natural fiber using the example of kenaf consumes comparatively less than 10% of fossil energy and generates about 30% of greenhouse gas emissions without considering CO2 storage [18]. This corresponds to the EOL scenario of landfilling, where the stored CO2 is released (see Fig. 3). The land use of 1,040 m2 of arable land per ton of kenaf can again be converted into a missing annual storage capacity of 10 t/ha of forest [19]. As a result, the EOL scenario Landfill is slightly advantageous for fiber, while Power from WIP is only possible for kenaf and shows clear advantages. Again, extrapolated to the annual global glass fiber consumption in plastics of about 5 million tons, this would require about 5,200 km2 of farmland. In return, 7.3 million tons of CO2 would be saved in the EOL scenario Power from WIP, which corresponds to the annual binding by approx. 5,400 km2 of forest.
4.3 Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Materials
The comparison of polymers and fiber materials with regard to greenhouse gas emissions without and with consideration of land use in the form of missing CO2 storage capacity now leads to a comparison of glass fiber reinforced PET (PET GF) with PLA reinforced with kenaf fiber (PLA KF), which has 70–90% of the tensile strengths. Both composites are considered with a realistic 50% weight share of fiber material. Without taking land use into account, PLA KF causes about 60% of the greenhouse gas emissions of PET GF with the EOL scenario Landfill and about 30% with the EOL scenario Power from WIP (see Fig. 4). If land use in the form of lost forest storage capacity is included, PLA KF is significantly above PET GF with the EOL scenario Landfill, while the EOL scenario Power from WIP leads to 72% of the GHG emissions. The most climate-friendly EOL scenario here is also mechanical recycling, whereby fiber shortening during shredding leads to lower strength. The contribution of the use of natural fiber-reinforced degradable biopolymers to climate protection with the inclusion of land use is mainly determined by the EOL scenarios for a product lifetime of one year. If the product lifetime doubles, the influence of land use on the CO2 balance is halved. Composting or landfilling lead to the release of the stored CO2, whereas with PET GF this lack of effect leads to a better balance. Nevertheless, the biodegradability of composites made of biopolymer and natural fibers reduces the environmental impact of wild dumping. Microplastic emissions are estimated at 5–18 million tons of plastic worldwide [21]. The share of thermoplastic emissions for Germany is estimated at 38% in the same study. For conventional plastics, a degradation time of 2,000 years is assumed, which leads to the already visible and problematic accumulation in the environment.
5 Conclusion
The present analysis shows that the use of composites based on bio-based and biodegradable materials is possible. Suitable matrix materials as well as reinforcing materials in the form of natural fibers are available for this purpose. The feasibility of these bio composites has already been extensively demonstrated. Additive manufacturing in the form of FFM is particularly suitable for implementation, as the insertion of fibers can be excellently integrated here. The economic and ecological analysis shows that the use of biomaterials makes a significant contribution to climate protection compared to conventional materials, if the products are used for a long time and recycled for materials or energy after use. However, these potentials are not yet being exploited on a large scale, as natural fibers are hardly available for additive manufacturing. In contrast to conventional composites, there is also a lack of suitable manufacturing systems that allow simple and safe processing of natural fibers in conjunction with bio-based matrix materials.
References
Wohlers, T., Campbell, R.I., Diegel, O., Kowen, J., Mostow, N.: Wohlers report 2021. 3D printing and additive manufacturing: global state of the industry. Wohlers Associates, Fort Collins, Colorado (2021)
Gibson, I., Rosen, D., Stucker, B., Khorasani, M.: Additive Manufacturing Technologies. Springer eBook Collection, Cham (2021)
Domm, M.: Additive Fertigung kontinuierlich faserverstärkter Thermoplaste mittels 3D-Extrusion. IVW-Schriftenreihe, Band, no. 138 (2020)
Fidan, I., et al.: The trends and challenges of fiber reinforced additive manufacturing. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 102(5–8), 1801–1818 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-03269-7
Wambua, P., Ivens, J., Verpoest, I.: Natural fibers: can they replace glass in fiber reinforced plastics? Compos. Sci. Technol. (2003)
Mangat, A.S., Singh, S., Gupta, M., Sharma, R.: Experimental investigations on natural fiber embedded AM-based biodegradable structures for biomedical applications. RPJ 24, 1221–1234 (2018)
Balla, V.K., Kate, K.H., Satyavolu, J., Singh, P., Tadimeti, J.G.D.: Additive manufacturing of natural fiber reinforced polymer composites: Processing and prospects. Compos. Part B: Eng. 174, 106956 (2019)
Pandelidi, C., Bateman, S., Piegert, S., Hoehner, R., Kelbassa, I., Brandt, M.: The technology of continuous fiber-reinforced polymers: a review on extrusion additive manufacturing methods. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 113, 3057–3077 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-021-06837-6
Junk, S., Dorner, M., Fleig, C.: Additive manufacturing of continuous carbon fiber-reinforced plastic components. In: Scholz, S.G., Howlett, R.J., Setchi, R. (eds.) Sustainable Design and Manufacturing 2020. SIST, vol. 200, pp. 149–159. Springer, Singapore (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8131-1_14
Witten, E., Mathes, V.: Der Markt für Glasfaserverstärkte Kunststoffe (GFK) 2020 (2022). https://www.avk-tv.de/files/20201111_avk_marktbericht_2020.pdf.Accessed11.April
Umweltbundesamt: Biobasierte und biologisch abbaubare Kunststoffe (2020). https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/biobasierte-biologisch-abbaubare-kunststoffe#haufig-gestellte-fragen-faq. Accessed 20 Dec 2021
SmarTech Publishing: New SmarTech Report: 3D Printed Composites Market Taking Off with Part Production Driving Global Revenues to Nearly $10 Billion by 2028 (2017). https://www.mcadcafe.com/nbc/articles/1/1637105/New-SmarTech-Report-3D-Printed-Composites-Market-Taking-Off-with-Part-Production-Driving-Global-Revenues-Nearly-10-Billion-by-2028. Accessed 17 Dec 2021
Vink, E.T.H., Davies, S.: Life cycle inventory and impact assessment data for 2014 Ingeo ™ Polylactide production. Ind. Biotechnol. 11, 167–180 (2015)
Morão, A., de Bie, F.: Life cycle impact assessment of Polylactic Acid (PLA) produced from sugarcane in Thailand. J. Polym. Environ. 27(11), 2523–2539 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10924-019-01525-9
Schulz, C.: Marktzahlen & Marktentwicklung biobasierter/bioabbaubarer Kunststoffe (2018). https://www.ifbb-hannover.de/files/IfBB/downloads/webinarreihe/20180118_Webinar_16_Marktzahlen.pdf. Accessed 21 Dec 2021
Rossi, V., et al.: Life cycle assessment of end-of-life options for two biodegradable packaging materials: sound application of the European waste hierarchy. J. Cleaner Prod. 86, 132–145 (2015)
Deng, Y.: Life Cycle Assessment of biobased fiber-reinforced polymer composites (2014)
Rezvani Ghomi, E., et al.: The life cycle assessment for Polylactic acid (PLA) to make it a low-carbon material. Polymers 13, 1854 (2021)
De Beus, N., Carus, M., Barth, M.: Carbon Footprint and Sustainability of Different Natural Fibers for Biocomposites and Insulation Material (2019). http://eiha.org/media/2019/03/19-03-13-Study-Natural-Fiber-Sustainability-Carbon-Footprint.pdf. Accessed 11 April 2022
La Rosa, A., Grammatikos, S.: Comparative life cycle assessment of cotton and other natural fibers for textile applications. Fibers 7, 101 (2019)
Bertling, J., Hamann, L., Bertling, R. (Eds.): Kunststoffe in der Umwelt. Kurzfassung der Konsortialstudie, Fraunhofer-Institut für Umwelt-, Sicherheits- und Energietechnik (2018)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s)
About this paper
Cite this paper
Friedel, A., Junk, S. (2023). Potential Analysis for the Use of Bio-Based Plastics with Natural Fiber Reinforcement in Additive Manufacturing. In: Kohl, H., Seliger, G., Dietrich, F. (eds) Manufacturing Driving Circular Economy. GCSM 2022. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28839-5_32
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28839-5_32
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-28838-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-28839-5
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)