Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Role of Manufacturing Variability on Environmental Impact

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
REWAS 2019

Part of the book series: The Minerals, Metals & Materials Series ((MMMS))

  • 1912 Accesses

Abstract

Additive manufacturing (AM) especially metal additive manufacturing (MAM) is expected to disrupt many industries. Besides being very flexible and allowing bespoke parts with little to no setup time, AM technology is able to fabricate parts with geometries which were previously impossible to create. This allows for dramatically better designs by making the product lighter or more efficient. However, despite these numerous and significant benefits, the uptake of functional additive manufactured parts is slow. A major barrier to expedited uptake of this technology is process control. It is not certain what the most important process parameters or the ideal process windows are and how this changes for different process/material combinations. As of yet, there is not a set process to certify an AM part or process. This makes quality assurance prohibitively longwinded and expensive. Furthermore, to ensure safety under such uncertain conditions, a high safety factor and therefore thicker parts must be used. As a result, uncertainty is also tied to increased material consumption and therefore higher environmental impact. We need to better understand the nature of variability in AM in order to alleviate some of these problems. This manuscript presents several examples of the influence of variability in manufacturing and its potential impact on environmental performance.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. EIA (2016) International energy outlook. In: International Energy Outlook, pp 1–2

    Google Scholar 

  2. UNEP (2011) Decoupling natural resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cleveland CJ, Ruth M (1999) Indicators of dematerialization and the materials intensity of use. J Ind Ecol 2(3):15–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ng PK, Goh GGG, Eze UC (2010) The influence of total quality management, concurrent engineering and knowledge management in a semiconductor manufacturing firm. In: 2010 IEEE international conference on industrial engineering and engineering management (IEEM), pp 240–244

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kaynak H (2003) The relationship between total quality management practices and their effects on firm performance. J Oper Manag 21(4):405–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gupta V, Jain R, Meena ML, Dangayach GS (2018) Six-sigma application in tire-manufacturing company: a case study. J Ind Eng Int 14(3):511–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Prasad AG, Saravanan S, Gijo EV, Dasari SM, Tatachar R, Suratkar P (2013) Six sigma-based approach to optimise the diffusion process of crystalline silicon solar cell manufacturing. Int J Sustain Energy 35(2):190–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Gijo EV, Scaria J (2014) Process improvement through six sigma with beta correction: a case study of manufacturing company. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 71(1–4):717–730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gustavsson L, Sathre R (2006) Variability in energy and carbon dioxide balances of wood and concrete building materials. Build Environ 41(7):940–951

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Noshadravan G, Gaustad A, Kirchain R, Olivetti E (2017) Operational strategies for increasing secondary materials in metals production under uncertainty. J Sustain Metall 3(2):350–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hardt DE (1993) Modeling and control of manufacturing processes: getting more involved. ASME J Dyn Syst Meas Control 115(2B):291–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Tang K (1988) Economic design of product specifications for a complete inspection plan. Int J Prod Res 26(2):203–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. ASTM (2015) ASTM F3114-15. Astm i:1–5

    Google Scholar 

  14. DoD (1997) Department of defense handbook composite materials handbook. In: Polymer matrix composites guidelines for characterization of structural materials, vol 1

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sartori I, Hestnes AG (2007) Energy use in the life cycle of conventional and low-energy buildings: a review article. Energy Build 39(3):249–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Del Pero F, Delogu M, Pierini M, Bonaffini D (2015) Life cycle assessment of a heavy metro train. J Clean Prod 87(1):787–799

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Andrew RM (2018) Global CO2 emissions from cement production. Earth Syst Sci Data 1–52

    Google Scholar 

  18. Obla K (2010) Sources of concrete strength variation—Part II of concrete quality series. In: Tech talk concrete in focus, pp 21–23

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cook JE, Parnes J, Akers DJ, Barringer WL, Brown JL, Graf A (2011) Evaluation of strength test results of concrete. Test 1–20

    Google Scholar 

  20. ACI (2014) Building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318-14), vol 11

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kingon AI, Maria JP, Streiffer SK (2000) Alternative dielectrics to silicon dioxide for memory and logic devices. Nature 406(6799):1032–1038

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Ozdemir S, Sinha D, Memik G, Adams J, Zhou H (2006) Yield-aware cache architectures. In: Proceedings of annual international symposium on microarchitecture, MICRO. pp 15–25

    Google Scholar 

  23. Slater M (1995) Intel boosts pentium pro to 200 MHz. Microprocess Rep 9(17)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Boggs D et al (2004) The microarchitecture of the Intel® Pentium® 4 processor on 90 nm technology. Intel Technol J 08(1–18):119–130

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kuhn K et al (2008) Managing process variation in Intel’s 45 nm CMOS technology. Intel J Technol 12(45):77–85

    Google Scholar 

  26. Mesogitis TS, Skordos AA, Long AC (2014) Uncertainty in the manufacturing of fibrous thermosetting composites: a review. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 57:67–75

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. US Department of Defense (2002) Composite materials handbook. In: Polymer matrix composites materials usage, design, and analysis, vol 3

    Google Scholar 

  28. van Grootel A, Chang J, Olivetti E. Economic and environmental cost of variability in manufacturing: the case of carbon fiber reinforced polymer composite in the aerospace industry (in progress)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Friedrich K, Almajid AA (2013) Manufacturing aspects of advanced polymer composites for automotive applications. Appl Compos Mater 20(2):107–128

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Vosteen LF, Hadcock RN (1994) Composite chronicles: a study of the lessons learned in the development, production, and service of composite structures

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hale J (2008) Boeing 787 from the ground up 06. Boeing

    Google Scholar 

  32. Quilter A (2004) Composites in aerospace applications. Inf Handl Serv Inc 1–5

    Google Scholar 

  33. Bonnín Roca J, Vaishnav P, Fuchs ERH, Morgan MG (2016) Policy needed for additive manufacturing. Nat Mater 15(8):815–818

    Google Scholar 

  34. FAA (2016) Summary report: joint federal aviation administration—air force workshop on qualification/certification of additively manufactured parts, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  35. Everton SK, Hirsch M, Stravroulakis P, Leach RK, Clare AT (2016) Review of in-situ process monitoring and in-situ metrology for metal additive manufacturing. Mater Des 95:431–445

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Huang R et al (2016) Energy and emissions saving potential of additive manufacturing: the case of lightweight aircraft components. J Clean Prod 135:1559–1570

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This publication was made possible with the support of the Government of Portugal through the Portuguese Foundation for International Cooperation in Science, Technology, and Higher Education, and was undertaken in the MIT Portugal Program.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Technology and Policy Program, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA

    Alexander van Grootel

  2. Department of Materials Science & Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA

    Jiyoun Chang & Elsa Olivetti

Authors
  1. Alexander van Grootel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jiyoun Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Elsa Olivetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elsa Olivetti .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Alfred University, Alfred, NY, USA

    Gabrielle Gaustad

  2. Gopher Resource, Eagan, MN, USA

    Camille Fleuriault

  3. Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway

    Mertol Gökelma

  4. Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA

    John A. Howarter

  5. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA

    Randolph Kirchain

  6. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

    Kaka Ma

  7. Umicore, Olen, Belgium

    Christina Meskers

  8. IND LLC, South Jordan, UT, USA

    Neale R. Neelameggham

  9. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA

    Elsa Olivetti

  10. Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA, USA

    Adam C. Powell

  11. Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA, USA

    Fiseha Tesfaye

  12. Johan Gadolin Process Chem Ctr, Abo Akademi University, Turku, Finland

    Dirk Verhulst

  13. ArcelorMittal Global R&D, Schererville, IN, USA

    Mingming Zhang

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

van Grootel, A., Chang, J., Olivetti, E. (2019). The Role of Manufacturing Variability on Environmental Impact. In: Gaustad, G., et al. REWAS 2019. The Minerals, Metals & Materials Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10386-6_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation