Insights Into Emissions and Exposures From Use of Industrial-Scale Additive Manufacturing Machines

Abstract

Background Emerging reports suggest the potential for adverse health effects from exposure to emissions from some additive manufacturing (AM) processes. There is a paucity of real-world data on emissions from AM machines in industrial workplaces and personal exposures among AM operators. Methods Airborne particle and organic chemical emissions and personal exposures were characterized using real-time and time-integrated sampling techniques in four manufacturing facilities using industrial-scale material extrusion and material jetting AM processes. Results Using a condensation nuclei counter, number-based particle emission rates (ERs) (number/min) from material extrusion AM machines ranged from 4.1 × 10 10 (Ultem filament) to 2.2 × 10 11 [acrylonitrile butadiene styrene and polycarbonate filaments). For these same machines, total volatile organic compound ERs (μg/min) ranged from 1.9 × 10 4 (acrylonitrile butadiene styrene and polycarbonate) to 9.4 × 10 4 (Ultem). For the material jetting machines, the number-based particle ER was higher when the lid was open (2.3 × 10 10 number/min) than when the lid was closed (1.5–5.5 × 10 9 number/min); total volatile organic compound ERs were similar regardless of the lid position. Low levels of acetone, benzene, toluene, and m,p -xylene were common to both AM processes. Carbonyl compounds were detected; however, none were specifically attributed to the AM processes. Personal exposures to metals (aluminum and iron) and eight volatile organic compounds were all below National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)-recommended exposure levels. Conclusion Industrial-scale AM machines using thermoplastics and resins released particles and organic vapors into workplace air. More research is needed to understand factors influencing real-world industrial-scale AM process emissions and exposures.

Exploring Methods for Surveillance of Occupational Exposure from Additive Manufacturing in Four Different Industrial Facilities

“…Research that includes measurements of personal exposures in real industrial occupational settings is limited. Exposure from printing polymeric materials has been assessed for ME ( Du Preez, 2018 ; Stefaniak et al , 2019b , c ) and MJ ( Stefaniak et al , 2019b ). Väisänen et al (2019) evaluated exposure from different printing methods in industrial settings (ME, VP, PBF, and MJ) and similar research was done by Zisook et al (2020) .…”

State of the art in additive manufacturing and its possible chemical and particle hazards—review

“…According to Wojtyła et al, 41 new air filtration technologies should be developed. Therefore, further research is needed to understand 3D printer's emissions, exposure, and the effectiveness of occupational protective measures 168 …”

“…Therefore, further research is needed to understand 3D printer's emissions, exposure, and the effectiveness of occupational protective measures. 168 …”

Particle emission levels in the user operating environment of powder, ink and filament-based 3D printers

“…The process to comprehensively evaluate emissions from the diverse range of 3D printers and their environmental implications is complicated and expensive considering the large number of printing variables in additive manufacturing including material types (polymers, metals, ceramics, composites and biological materials), material forms (filament, liquid and powder), printing processes (from filament extrusion to PBF to DED), indoor environments (industrial facility, labs, offices and home) and various pre-possessing and postprocessing options (Chua and Leong, 2014;Rejeski et al, 2018;Stefaniak et al, 2019). As such, in this study, these large numbers of variables are addressed through the investigation of particle emissions from different 3D printing processes that uses different materials and forms, starting from the preprocessing stage to printing and ending at post-processing, all conducted on-site to understand their effects on their operating environment.…”