Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Quantitative Analysis of Carbon Emissions in Precision Turning Processes and Industrial Case Study

  • Regular Paper
  • Published:
International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

With growing concerns regarding the global environment, the industrial sector has played a significant role; that is, it is responsible for consuming large amount of energy and resources, while simultaneously producing wastes and carbon dioxide. A quantitative calculation of carbon emission in the turning process is presented in this paper. A generic carbon emission system boundary based on exergy balance is proposed first to avoid blurred system boundaries or the omission of elements. Then, a carbon emission model (iERWC) is formed by converting energy consumption (E), resource depletion (R) and waste generation (W) to equivalent carbon emissions (C) based on information flow (i), which effectively solves the problem of quantifying the impact of the machining process on the environment. Finally, the model is verified by experiments, and a simulation analysis is carried out. Additionally, the influence rule of processing parameters on carbon emissions is analyzed, and the cutting parameter that produces the lowest carbon emission is given.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

(adapted from [21])

Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

a p :

Cutting depth (mm)

C emission :

The sum of carbon emissions originated from energy consumption, resource depletion and waste generation associated with the machining process (g)

C energy :

Carbon emission caused by energy consumption (g)

C resource :

Carbon emission caused by resource depletion (g)

C waste :

Carbon emission caused by waste generation (g)

CF ene :

Carbon emission factor of electricity (g/kwh)

C tool-use :

Carbon emissions from tool usage (g)

C sharpening :

Carbon emissions from the tool sharpening process (g)

C electricity-s :

Carbon emission caused by energy consumption during the tool sharpening process (g)

C grinding fluid-s :

Carbon emission caused by grinding fluid usage during the tool sharpening process (g)

C grinding wheel-s :

Carbon emission caused by grinding wheel usage during the tool sharpening process (g)

C tool :

Carbon emissions caused by tools, which include the tool usage stage and the tool sharpening process (g)

CF tool :

Carbon emission factor of the cutting tools (g/kg)

C T :

Constant related to the cutting conditions

CF c-pro :

Carbon emission factor of coolant fluid production (g/L)

CF c-dis :

Carbon emission factor for material disposal (g/L)

CF materical :

Carbon emission factor of material production (g/kg)

CF disposal :

Carbon emission factor for its disposal (g/kg)

EC ene :

Energy consumption of machine tools (kwh)

E in :

Total exergy input (kJ)

E tr :

Exergy that leaves the system without undergoing any transformation (kJ)

E out :

Exergy output (kJ)

E in,loss :

Internal exergy losses (kJ)

E ex,loss :

External exergy losses (kJ)

E tr,ex :

Transiting exergy in the loss stream (kJ)

E pro :

Produced utilizable exergy (kJ)

E tr,u :

Transiting exergy in the utilizable stream (kJ)

E u :

Utilizable exergy output (kJ)

f :

Feed rate (mm/r)

iERWC:

Short for the quantitative carbon emission model for calculating carbon emissions (C) in metal cutting processes by converting the energy consumption (E), resource depletion (R) and waste generation (W) to equivalent carbon emissions based on information flow (i)

k 0 :

Specific energy in cutting operations (J/mm3)

k 1 :

Specific coefficient of the spindle motor (J/r)

k 2 :

Constant coefficient of the machine tools (W)

L c :

length of a cut (mm)

M chips :

Weight of removed material (g)

MRR :

Material removal rate (cm3/min)

M tool :

Weight of a tool (g)

N :

Sharpening times

N cool :

The coolant addition times before full replacement

P basic :

Basic power consumption to maintain the electrical device operation when the machine is power on (W)

P idle :

Idle power (W)

P :

Cutting power (W)

P stand-by :

Period when the machine tool stays without any operations (s)

Q cool :

Total volume of the coolant fluid (L)

Q cool-add :

Adding coolant fluid volume each time (L)

Q cool-dis :

Coolant fluid to be disposed (L)

t idle :

Period when the spindle rotates but without cutting (s)

t cut :

Actual cutting time (s)

T tool :

Life cycle of cutting tools (h)

T t-orig :

Utility time of the tool from the factory to the first sharpening (s)

T t-sharp :

Utility time between two sharpening processes (s)

T cool :

Cooling time between two additions (s)

T c-use :

The duration of cooling in metal cutting processes (h)

T lub-int :

Spindle running time (h)

V c :

Cutting speed (m/min)

x, y, z :

Indices relevant to tool durability

References

  1. He, B., Huang, S., & Wang, J. (2015). Product low-carbon design using dynamic programming algorithm. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, 2(1), 37–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. http://www.iea.org/statistics/topics/CO2emissions/. Accessed 24 Apr 2019.

  3. Jang, D. Y., Jung, J., & Seok, J. (2016). Modeling and parameter optimization for cutting energy reduction in MQL milling process. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, 3(1), 5–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. http://mt.sohu.com/20160901/n467084816.shtml. Accessed 24 Apr 2019.

  5. Choi, Y. J., Lee, S. K., Lee, I. K., et al. (2015). Multi-stage forging process design of steering system output shaft for reduction of energy consumption. International Journal of Precision Engineering & Manufacturing, 16(7), 1455–1460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Jeswiet, J., & Hauschild, M. (2005). EcoDesign and future environmental impacts. Mater Des, 26(7), 629–634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ahn, D. G. (2016). Direct metal additive manufacturing processes and their sustainable applications for green technology: A review. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, 3(4), 381–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Tridech, S., & Cheng, K. (2011). Low carbon manufacturing: Characterisation, theoretical models and implementation. International Journal of Manufacturing Research, 6(6), 110–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Fang, K., Uhan, N., Zhao, F., et al. (2011). A new approach to scheduling in manufacturing for power consumption and carbon footprint reduction. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 30(4), 234–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Tang, D., & Min, D. (2015). Energy-efficient approach to minimizing the energy consumption in an extended job-shop scheduling problem. Chinese Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 28(5), 1048–1055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Zhang, L., Ma, J., Fu, Y., et al. (2016). Carbon emission analysis for product assembly process. Journal of mechanical Engineering, 52(3), 151–160. (in Chinese).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cao, H., Li, H., Cheng, H., et al. (2012). A carbon efficiency approach for life-cycle carbon emission characteristics of machine tools. Journal of Cleaner Production, 37(4), 19–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Brecher, C., Jasper, D., & Fey, M. (2017). Analysis of new, energy-efficient hydraulic unit for machine tools. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, 4(1), 5–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ball, P. D., Evans, S., Levers, A., et al. (2009). Zero carbon manufacturing facility—towards integrating material, energy, and waste process flows. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 223(9), 1085–1096.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Li, C., Tang, Y., Cui, L., et al. (2015). A quantitative approach to analyze carbon emissions of CNC-based machining systems. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 26(5), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ding, H., Guo, D., Cheng, K., et al. (2013). An investigation on quantitative analysis of energy consumption and carbon footprint in the grinding process. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 228(6), 950–956.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Foo, D. C. Y., & Tan, R. R. (2016). A review on process integration techniques for carbon emissions and environmental footprint problems. Process Safety & Environmental Protection, 103, 291–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Zhou, L., Li, J., Li, F., et al. (2015). Energy consumption model and energy efficiency of machine tools: A comprehensive literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 3721–3734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Camposeco-Negrete, C. (2013). Optimization of cutting parameters for minimizing energy consumption in turning of AISI 6061 T6 using Taguchi methodology and ANOVA. Journal of Cleaner Production, 53(16), 195–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Szargut, J. M., Morris, D. R., & Steward, F. R. (1988). Exergy Analysis of Thermal, Chemical, and Metallurgical Processes. New York: Hemisphere Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Sorin, M., Lambert, J., & Paris, J. (1998). Exergy flows analysis in chemical reactors. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 76(3), 389–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Climate Change Department of National Development and Reform Commission, Announcement to Publish 2009 Baseline Emission Factors for Regional Power Grids in China. (2009). https://www.docin.com/p-644213590.html. Accessed 18 Sep 2018

  23. Deng, Z., Lv, L., Huang, W., et al. (2019). A high efficiency and low carbon oriented machining process route optimization model and its application. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, 6, 23–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Li, L., Yan, J., & Xing, Z. (2013). Energy requirements evaluation of milling machines based on thermal equilibrium and empirical modelling. Journal of Cleaner Production, 52(4), 113–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Gutowski, T., Dahmus, J., Thiriez, A. (2006). Electrical energy requirements for manufacturing processes. In 13th CIRP international conference on life cycle engineering, Leuven, 31 May–2 June 2006. CIRP Press, 2006.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This project is supported by National Hi-tech Research and Development Program of China (863 Program, Grant no. 2014AA041503).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Mechatronics Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, Heilongjiang, 150001, China

    Zhipeng Jiang, Dong Gao, Yong Lu, Linghao Kong & Zhendong Shang

Authors
  1. Zhipeng Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dong Gao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yong Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Linghao Kong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zhendong Shang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yong Lu.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jiang, Z., Gao, D., Lu, Y. et al. Quantitative Analysis of Carbon Emissions in Precision Turning Processes and Industrial Case Study. Int. J. of Precis. Eng. and Manuf.-Green Tech. 8, 205–216 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40684-019-00155-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40684-019-00155-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation