P103 Identification of nanoparticles in engineered nanomaterials containing consumer products

Kim, Yoojin; Park, Jihoon; Yoon, Chungsik; Jang, Miyeon; Lee, Jinho; Ham, Seunghon; Kim, Sun-Ju; Kim, Sungkyoon; Park, Dong-Uk; Kwon, Junhyun; Kim, Hyun-Mi; Kim, Pilje; Choi, Kyunghee

doi:10.1136/oemed-2016-103951.424

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Mendes et al showed that the release rate of particles before and after printing was increased by 3 orders of magnitude. 59 In the study of Stephens et al, 3D printing was identified as a "high emitter" of ultrafine particles, where release rates were >10 10 particles/ min during the printing process. 41 Du Preez et al reported that particle number concentrations increased from nearly zero to as high as 200000 particles/cm 3 when 3D printers were running.…”

Section: Printingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition to PM 2.5 and VOCs, 3D printing also emits numerous compounds such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), phthalates, ozone, metal or metalloid dusts (e.g., Cr, Ni, Si, Ca, Mg, Na, Al, and Fe), etc. 10,46,47,56 pose a threat to operating staff to some extent. It is noteworthy that the emission of these pollutants is largely associated with additives used, including pigments, dyes, plasticizers, stabilizers, wood particles, metal particles, and carbon allotropes.…”

Section: Printingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

3D Printing-Induced Fine Particle and Volatile Organic Compound Emission: An Emerging Health Risk

Min

Wang

et al. 2021

Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

3D printing, a technology that allows the layer-bylayer construction of complex 3D structures from a range of precursor materials, has shown promising applicability in construction and in the automotive, aerospace, defense, biomedicine, and consumer electronics industries. A key concern, however, is the health effects and safety problems due to its emission of fine particles (PM 2.5 , particles with aerodynamic diameters of <2.5 μm) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Understanding the characteristics and relevant toxicological effects of 3D printing-emitted PM 2.5 and VOCs is important for its health risk assessment and safe application. Here, we thoroughly review the emission levels of PM 2.5 and VOCs in workplaces, the simulation tests of laboratory environment, and the in vitro and in vivo evaluation of 3D printing-emitted PM 2.5 and VOCs. Meanwhile, standard protocols are recommended in the assessment of hazard risks of 3D printers to obtain better comparability of the results. Some safety guidance for 3D printer users is also provided. Finally, we point out the current research gaps and discuss the challenges encountered in this field. This review will be beneficial for the understanding of the health risks of emitted PM 2.5 and VOCs from 3D printing for the development of safer 3D printing technologies.

show abstract

Section: Printingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Printingmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D Printing-Induced Fine Particle and Volatile Organic Compound Emission: An Emerging Health Risk

Min

Wang

et al. 2021

Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To date, most of particle composition measurements reported have focused on organic compounds and metals. 9,13,15−17 Measurements show that the average particle emission rates during 3D printing range from 2 × 10 8 to 2 × 10 12 min −1 , 3,[5][6][7][8][9]15,17,18 and most of the emitted particles are ultrafine (less than 0.1 μm diameter). 6,7,9 Ultrafine particles are potentially harmful because they can deposit in the respiratory tract, enter the blood stream, translocate to remote organs, and damage mitochondria because of their specific properties.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9,13,15−17 Measurements show that the average particle emission rates during 3D printing range from 2 × 10 8 to 2 × 10 12 min −1 , 3,[5][6][7][8][9]15,17,18 and most of the emitted particles are ultrafine (less than 0.1 μm diameter). 6,7,9 Ultrafine particles are potentially harmful because they can deposit in the respiratory tract, enter the blood stream, translocate to remote organs, and damage mitochondria because of their specific properties. 19−21 A well-established mechanism associated with particle adverse biological effects, for both nanoparticles (NPs) 22 and ambient fine particles, 23 is the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), the excess of which causes cellular damage and induces oxidative stress.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chemical Composition and Toxicity of Particles Emitted from a Consumer-Level 3D Printer Using Various Materials

Zhang

Pardo²,

Rudich³

et al. 2019

Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Consumer-level 3D printers emit ultrafine and fine particles, though little is known about their chemical composition or potential toxicity. We report chemical characteristics of the particles in comparison to raw filaments and assessments of particle toxicity. Particles emitted from polylactic acid (PLA) appeared to be largely composed of the bulk filament material with mass spectra similar to the PLA monomer spectra. Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), extruded at a higher temperature than PLA, emitted vastly more particles and their composition differed from that of the bulk filament, suggesting that trace additives may control particle formation. In vitro cellular assays and in vivo mice exposure all showed toxic responses when exposed to PLA and ABS-emitted particles, where PLA-emitted particles elicited higher response levels than ABS-emitted particles at comparable mass doses. A chemical assay widely used in ambient air-quality studies showed that particles from various filament materials had comparable particle oxidative potentials, slightly lower than those of ambient particulate matter (PM 2.5 ). However, particle emissions from ABS filaments are likely more detrimental when considering overall exposure due to much higher emissions. Our results suggest that 3D printer particle emissions are not benign and exposures should be minimized.

show abstract

“…Other compounds, unlikely to be present in pristine polymer material, were also detected. Ethylbenzene is the most commonly reported styrene degradation product, 5,6,11,16 but in this work we also report 4-vinylcyclohexene, isopropylbenzene, benzaldehyde, α-methylstyrene, acetophenone, and 2phenyl-2-propanol. Figure 2 presents proposed pathways to the observed thermal degradation products of ABS at low temperatures.…”

Section: ■ Materials and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 48%

VOC Emissions and Formation Mechanisms from Carbon Nanotube Composites during 3D Printing

Potter¹,

Al-Abed²,

Lay

et al. 2019

Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A commercially-available, 3D printer nanocomposite filament of carbon nanotubes (CNTs) and acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS) was analyzed with respect to its VOC emissions during simulated fused deposition modelling (FDM) and compared with a regular ABS filament. VOC emissions were quantified and characterized under a variety of conditions to simulate the thermal degradation that takes place during FDM. Increasing residence time and temperature resulted in significant increases in VOC emissions and oxygen content of the reaction gas influenced the VOC profile. In agreement with other studies, the primary emitted VOC was styrene. Multiple compounds are reported in this work for the first time as having formed during FDM, including 4vinylcyclohexene and 2-phenyl-2-propanol. Our results show that printing 222.0 g of filament is enough to surpass the reference concentration for inhalation exposure of 1 mg/m 3 according to the EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). The presence of CNTs in the filament influenced VOC yields and product ratios through three types of surface interactions: 1) adsorption of O 2 on CNTs lowers the available O 2 for oxidation of primary backbone cleavage intermediates, 2) adsorption of styrene and other VOCs to CNTs leads to surface-catalyzed degradation, and 3) CNTs act as a trap for certain VOCs and prevent them from entering vapor emissions. While the presence of CNTs in the filament lowered the total VOC emission under most experimental conditions, they increased the emission of the most hazardous VOCs, such as α-methylstyrene and benzaldehyde. The present study has identified an increased risk associated with the use of CNT nanocomposites in 3D printing.

show abstract

P103 Identification of nanoparticles in engineered nanomaterials containing consumer products

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

3D Printing-Induced Fine Particle and Volatile Organic Compound Emission: An Emerging Health Risk

3D Printing-Induced Fine Particle and Volatile Organic Compound Emission: An Emerging Health Risk

Chemical Composition and Toxicity of Particles Emitted from a Consumer-Level 3D Printer Using Various Materials

VOC Emissions and Formation Mechanisms from Carbon Nanotube Composites during 3D Printing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About