Applied Materials Today 20 (2020) 100689

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Materials Today

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apmt

On the environmental impacts of 3D printing technology

Mohammad Reza Khosravani∗, Tamara Reinicke
Chair of Product Development, University of Siegen, Paul-Bonatz-Str. 9-11, 57068 Siegen, Germany

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The introduction of new materials is tied to the rapid development of manufacturing processes. Addi-
Received 31 January 2020 tive manufacturing (AM) has been employed to fabricate a solid three-dimensional (3D) part directly
Revised 30 March 2020
from a computer-aided design (CAD) data. AM is an industrial process that has been widely employed
Accepted 3 May 2020
in different industries in the past few years. In fact, this 3D printing is a rapid prototyping technology
that involves a series of techniques. Although several challenges and limitations exist in the AM pro-
Keywords: cess currently, AM is expected to revolutionize the manufacturing process of engineering components.
Additive manufacturing However, despite the numerous applications of AM techniques in various industries, their environmental
Environmental impact impacts are not well documented. AM affords significant changes in production cost, energy consumption,
Energy consumption
and manufacturing lead times. All these issues have been considered to develop this technology to have
3D printing
higher efficiencies and lower environmental impacts. In this paper, we briefly review AM methods and
discuss their environmental impacts. Furthermore, we present the main advantages and disadvantages of
AM processes involving polymers. It can be concluded that AM is advantageous in some cases, exhibiting
lower energy consumption and comprising shorter manufacturing processes. The analysis and discussion
indicate the advantages, limitations, and future research directions for the industrial applications of AM.
© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction tomotive [3,4], aerospace [5,6], electronics [7,8], dentistry [9,10],

Manufacturing processes have been continuously developing
from conceptualization to actual methods suitable for the fabrica-
tion of complex products. In traditional manufacturing, fabrication
refers to the process where the raw materials are converted into
the final product. However, manufacturing is currently defined as
an integrated concept with production phases. In this context, var-
ious new concepts are introduced with fewer constraints on design
and production. Additive manufacturing (AM), nanotechnology and
next level robotics are examples of processes that are revolutioniz-
ing manufacturing technology.
AM, also known as three-dimensional (3D) printing technol-
ogy, was introduced as a rapid prototyping method that can be
used for different materials. As the name indicates, AM refers to
adding raw materials during manufacturing, which includes var-
ious assembly and rapid prototyping processes [1]. According to
the American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) and the Interna-
tional Organization for Standardization (ISO), AM is defined as the
“process of joining materials to make objects from 3D model data,
usually layer upon layer” [2]. However, currently, AM techniques
are being significantly utilized in various applications, such as au-
∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mohammadreza.khosravani@uni-siegen.de (M.R. Khosravani).
and medicine [11,12]. In AM, various materials can be used ow-
ing to their wide range of mechanical and chemical properties.
For example, acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), polylactic acid
(PLA), nylon, polycarbonate, and polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) have been
used in different AM processes [13–17]. This multimaterial printing
can be considered as a basic pillar for the development of future
technologies. The industrial applications of 3D printing proves that
the list of materials employed in this technique increases contin-
ually. The worldwide consumption of 3D printing systems, materi-
als software, and related issues is expected to result in an annual
growth of 22.3% in the next few years [18]. Moreover, IDTechEx
forecasts that the worldwide market for 3D printing materials will
be worth $23 billion by the year 2029 [19], demonstrating a sig-
nificant potential growth opportunity over the next decade. Con-
sidering this significant growth, various investigations must be per-
formed in this field, such as intelligent manufacturing in AM, waste
materials in 3D printing, occupational health, resource planning
and environmental impacts of the AM technique.
Although various engineering aspects have been studied con-
cerning of 3D printing over the years [20–31], literature review
indicates that the environmental impacts of 3D printing are not
well documented. In a study of the environmental impacts of AM
processes, several aspects can be considered. For instance, en-
ergy consumption, product life cycle, waste materials, water foot-
print, global warming potential and air pollution can be recognized

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmt.2020.100689
2352-9407/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 M.R. Khosravani and T. Reinicke / Applied Materials Today 20 (2020) 100689
as primary issues concerning the environmental impacts of AM.
The environmental impacts of AM depend on different parameters,
such as the typical process and utilized material.
With respect to the significant growth of AM, different research
projects have been concluded worldwide to ensure progress. The
US has developed an energy assessment model for AM to compare
the energy consumptions in AM and conventional manufacturing
processes [32]. Moreover, a large project has been defined in the
European Union (EU) i.e., “Additive Manufacturing Aiming Towards
Zero Waste & Efficient Production of High-Tech Metal Products”
[33]. In detail, the EU project comprised partners from industry
and academia and aimed to produce large defect-free AM metal-
lic components with close to zero waste. Consequently, an origi-
nally shaped metal part lighter than the original component has
been manufactured [34]. In [35], 3D printing was considered as an
environmentally friendly manufacturing process. In fact, it was re-
ported that a specific AM process indicates an improvement in en-
ergy efficiency, which results in a clean and healthy environment.
Recently, in [36], different materials for paste extrusion printing
have been tested to determine the environmental impacts of AM.
In this context, water-based pastes that can be bonded chemically
at room temperature were prepared. The researchers, conducted a
series of compression and tensile tests and claimed that the print-
ing energy and embodied impacts of the materials were reduced
by 75% and 82%, respectively. Additionally, an environmental as-
sessment of AM in the automotive industry was discussed in [37].
In detail, a life cycle assessment was used in metal 3D printing,
and the results indicated that utilizing low-impact feedstock mate-
rials and technological development resulted in environmental im-
provements. Moreover, it was concluded that the lightweight com-
ponents should be considered as a main factor in reducing energy
consumption.
Despite process improvements, current technological limita-
tions, lack of suitable metrics, and shortages of standards for
environmental impact assessment must be considered as barri-
ers in advanced manufacturing via AM. The aim of the present
manuscript is to gather, categorize, and analyze information on the
environmental effects of AM. Hence, we outline both the positive
and negative environmental effects of AM processes, which should
be considered for further developments. In this study, the environ-
mental impacts of AM were investigated considering three aspects:
(a) energy consumption, (b) waste materials, and (c) air pollution.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: in Section 2 an
overview of the AM processes is presented. Section 3 describes the
environmental impacts of AM processes that use polymeric mate-
rials. Moreover, some technical suggestions are presented. Finally,
a short summary in Section 4 concludes the paper.
2. Overview of additive manufacturing processes
AM is a relatively new technology that was developed in the
1980s, and has been used extensively in industry and academic in-
stitutes in the last few years. In 1984, the first 3D printer was fab-
ricated by Charles W. Hull [38]; however, the employed technology
was expensive and not feasible initially. Nevertheless, owing to ad-
vances and cost reductions in the current century, AM has been
applied in various fields and is expected to become prevalent as
home use in a few years.
3D and standard inkjet printers share a few similarities. How-
ever, a 3D printer requires a few additional steps to use the materi-
als required and create a 3D component. Based on the ASTM stan-
dard, AM processes can be classified into seven categories: binder
jetting (BJ), material extrusion (ME), directed energy deposition
(DED), material jetting (MJ), sheet lamination (SL), powder bed fu-
sion (PBF), and vat photo polymerization (VP) [39–42]. The men-
Fig. 1. A schematic of BJ process.
tioned categories and examples of AM processes are summarized
in Table 1.
Currently, polymers, aluminum and steel alloys, various com-
posites and ceramics are printable with minimum layer thicknesses
of 20–100 μm depending on the physical state of the material and
the AM process [43]. This ability to work with a wide range of ma-
terials, along with the few limitations in the fabrication of com-
plex geometries, have proven to be advantages of the AM com-
pared with conventional processes. However, multiple options are
available in terms of fabrication speed, layer thickness, resolution
and material selection in each AM method. In the following sec-
tions, the environmental impacts of different AM processes are dis-
cussed; herein, we briefly review these methods.
2.1. Binder jetting
Binder jetting was first developed at the Massachusetts Insti-
tute of Technology. Two years later, in 1995, the Z cooperation ob-
tained an exclusive license for the process. In the subsequent year,
the ExOne company was granted a patent [44,45]. In BJ process,
layer of material are bonded to form a desired component. Indeed,
powder particles are jointed together via selectively depositing a
liquid bonding agent. In BJ, the three-dimensional component is
fabricated by gluing the particles. A schematic of BJ process is il-
lustrated in Fig. 1. As the printed components are composed of
bound powder, an infiltration during post processing is needed. BJ
has been used for fabrication of multicolor parts, but the printed
parts suffer in terms of mechanical properties. Large build volume,
high print speed, easy post processing are advantages of BJ pro-
cess. As molds and machining are not needed in this technique, BJ
is a relatively low cost process. This AM technique can be used for
individual parts, small series, and the serial production of complex
components.
More than two decades after the invention of BJ, this AM
method has been employed for the fabrication of components with
a wide range of materials and dimensions in various commercial
applications.
2.2. Material extrusion
Material extrusion technology was developed by Scott Crump in
1989 and patented as fused deposition modeling (FDM) [46]. Cur-
rently, FDM 3D printing is the most popular method for the fab-
rication of polymer composites. In FDM, a raw material is pushed
out through a nozzle while a pressure is applied. In this process,
 M.R. Khosravani and T. Reinicke / Applied Materials Today 20 (2020) 100689 3

Table 1
Classification of AM processes based on ASTM standards.

Material Direct energy Sheet Powder bed Vat photo

Binder jetting extrusion deposition Material jetting lamination fusion polymerization

Voxeljet Fused Laser Stratasys’ Laminated Selective Laser

Deposition Engineered Net Polyjet Object Sintering Stereolithography
Modeling Shaping Manufacturing Apparatus
ExOne - - 3D System’s MCor’s A4 Selective Laser Digital Light
Mult-Jet Paper Printing Melting Processing
Printing
Color Jet Printing - - Solidscape Kira’ Paper Electron Beam -
Lamination Melting
Tech.

Table 2
Pros and cons of material extrusion technique.

Process Advantages Disadvantages

Material Low initial cost Visible layer lines

extrusion Small equipment size
Low temperature process
Acceptable printing tolerance
Easy and user-friendly method
Wide range of printing materials
Poor part strength
Nozzle radius limits
High surface roughness
Temperature fluctuation issues
Support material and structures

Fig. 2. Different categories of DED process.

a spool of thermoplastic filament must be melted and extruded
through a high temperature nozzle. In fact, layers have been cre-
ated by extruding molten material onto substrate. It is necessary
to bind the material with previous material in order to produce a
solid component. In the FDM process, different thermoplastic ma-
terials such as ABS, nylon, PLA, and polycarbonate can be used. Ac-
cording to applications of the FDM process, its capability of high-
speed printing has been proven in comparison with other AM tech-
niques [47–50]. In Table 2 pros and cons of ME as one of the AM
processes is summarized.
Advances in technology and new material developments enable
us to prepare carbon fiber and metallic particles in filaments suit-
able for AM, which can revolutionize the ME process.
or wire is sued in a multi-axis arm. Indeed, in DED the feed sup-
ply is not limited to a specific axis. Hence, in a DED printer there
is a nozzle head which can move around a fixed object in differ-
ent directions. In the manufacturing process, when the first layer
is deposited, the nozzle and energy source are moved to deposit
the next layer.
DED involves rapid cooling rates and has been primarily used
to print metal matrix composites and functionally graded materi-
als. Adding coating to existing surfaces, repairing components and
printing durable metal parts are advantages of the DED [53–55]. In
DED, both powder and wire feedstock materials can be used.
2.4. Material jetting

2.3. Directed energy deposition
One of the more complex 3D printing processes is directed en-
ergy deposition, which is typically utilized to repair existing parts.
DED 3D printing is a metal 3D printing process that was devel-
oped in the last century and includes different techniques, such as
laser engineered net shaping (LENS), direct light fabrication (DLF),
laser solid forming (LSF), and wire + Arc AM (WAAM) [51,52]. In
Fig. 2 different DED categories with respect to feedstock and en-
ergy source are illustrated. In DED process, a concentrated heat
source is employed which can be a plasma arc, laser or electron
beam. This melts the material deposited by a nozzle in the form
of powder or wire. In comparison, DED process is similar to ME,
but in DED technique the nozzle supplying the material particles
Material jetting is a relatively new and advanced AM process
that is similar to a two-dimensional ink jet printer. The MJ process
uses an array of nozzles to selectively deposit material which is
cured by a broad area energy source. In detail, in this AM method
a continuous or drop on demand approach can be used and the
liquid droplets are deposited on the working plate in order to par-
tially soften the previous layer of material, and solidify as one part.
Finally, the object must be detached from the building platform,
and the support material needs to be removed [56]. Support ma-
terial are necessary elements which are temporary during printing
process and usually should be removed at the end of the fabrica-
tion process. The MJ method can be used to print a component
with high resolution. In fact, the minimum resolution volume of
the MJ fabrication process is equal to the volume of one drop. In
4 M.R. Khosravani and T. Reinicke / Applied Materials Today 20 (2020) 100689
Fig. 3. Classification of main categories in SL process based on bonding mechanism.
Table 3
Pros and cons of material jetting method.
Process Advantages Disadvantages
Material Low waste High cost
jetting High resolution Slow printing process
Multiple materials High dimensional accuracy
Multiple print heads Poor mechanical properties
High quality surface Support materials and structures
this regard, MJ method provides droplet and layer sizes smaller
than 100 microns. This capability is beneficial in the fabrication
of medical models. Currently, photopolymers (in liquid form) and
casting wax are the most commonly used materials in MJ. Advan-
tages and disadvantages of MJ process are summarized in Table 3.
Owing to recent advances in MJ for printing electronic circuits,
different electronic components, such as capacitors, transistors, and
inductors have been fabricated by MJ [57]. However, utilizing MJ to
fabricate circuit boards simplifies the manufacturing process com-
pared with conventional methods.
2.5. Sheet lamination
Feygin and Pakat at Helisys Inc. introduced the sheet lamina-
tion technique in 1991 [58]. In the sheet lamination process, thin
sheets of materials are bonded layer by layer to produce a com-
ponent, which is then cut into the required object. Each sheet can
be considered as one of the cross sectional layer of the compo-
nent. In SL, material sheets can be cut by laser or combined with
ultrasonic. There are two main categories of this AM method: (a)
laminated objective manufacturing (LOM), and (b) ultrasonic addi-
tive manufacturing (UAM). In LOM adhesives are utilized for lam-
ination, while in UAM ultrasonic bonding is employed to laminate
sheets together. In Fig. 3 classification of LOM and UAM based on
bonding mechanism is depicted. The SL process can be used for
various materials, for instance: polymer, paper, ceramic and metal.
A suitable method must be used to bind the sheets of each ma-
terial. Low cost, high speed and ease of material handling are ad-
vantages of the SL process. The primary disadvantage of this AM
process is its inability in printing complex geometries. Moreover,
the SL method yield a poor to average resolution.
The SL technique has been used in various fields, such as the
ceramic industry, civil engineering, medicine, and foundry technol-
ogy [59]. New variations of the SL methods include other materials,
different bonding techniques, and new cutting processes. These can
result in more important roles for the SL process in the fabrication
of various engineering components.
2.6. Powder bed fusion
As powder bed fusion was developed in the mid-1980s, it is
recognized as one of the first commercialized AM processes [60].
In PBF, a thermal source (e.g., laser) is used to induce fusion
between the powder particles. In detail, after the scanning of a
Fig. 4. A schematic of powder bed fusion process.
layer, the powder material must be spread over the previous layer
[61,62]. For spreading of the powder material, a roller or a blade
under different mechanisms can be used. A schematic of the PBF
process is illustrated in Fig. 4. Sintering and melting are the main
binding mechanisms in PBF technique. It should be noted that
binding mechanism has a significant influence on the fabrication
speed and final part properties. Selective laser melting, selective
laser sintering, and electron beam melting are the most estab-
lished and prominent PBF processes, which have been widely used
in academia and industry for the 3D printing of metallic compo-
nents [63]. PBF technology has been extensively used worldwide in
the automobile, aerospace, and biomedical industries for fabricat-
ing components from metal, ceramic, and plastic [64]. All materials
that can be melted and resolidified, can theoretically be utilized in
PBF techniques.
One of the main advantages of the PBF process is that a sup-
port structure is not required for the polymeric components man-
ufactured by this AM method. In fact, because the powder acts
as an integrated support structure, PBF does not require support
structures, which can increase the design freedom. Moreover, this
technique is inexpensive and suitable for prototypes. Size limita-
tion, high power consumption, and relatively low-speed printing
are considered as disadvantages of this AM process.
2.7. Vat photo polymerization
The first commercial AM that utilized the vat photo polymeriza-
tion process or stereolithography (SLA) was developed by Charles
(Chuck) Hull, who was the co-founder of 3D Systems. The first
printer relying on an ultraviolet (UV) laser was commercialized in
1987, and it was used to fabricate a solid 3D part by curing one
layer over the previous layer [65,66]. Indeed, UV laser was used
to cure photosensitive resin point-by-point to make a component
 M.R. Khosravani and T. Reinicke / Applied Materials Today 20 (2020) 100689 5

Table 4
Advantages and disadvantages of vat photo polymerization technique.

Process Advantages Disadvantages

Vat photo High precision Poor durability

polymerization High resolution Fragility of parts
Excellent part quality Mechanical failure
Smooth printed surface Material limitations
Relatively quick process Support material and structures

based on a CAD file. The two most common kinds of VP tech-

nologies are: (a) SLA printing, where a high-powered laser is em-
ployed for hardening of liquid resin, and (b) digital light processing
(DLP), where LED projectors are utilized to polymerize the layers. It
should be noted that continuous liquid interface production (CLIP)
is one of the most advanced forms of VP technique which is sig-
nificantly faster than SLA method. The resolution of the final prod-
uct in the VP process can reach 200 nm with an excellent surface
finish [67]. Although the VP technique can be used for the man-
ufacturing of large-sized components, this AM process has some
drawbacks. In Table 4 some advantages and disadvantages of the
VP process are presented.
The VP method has been used by several research institutes
over the years [68–70], and different companies have pursued this Fig. 5. Different aspects in environmental impacts of AM processes.
AM process for various applications [71–73]. For instance, German
manufacturer Nanoscribe developed a two-photon polymerization cesses. The available LCA data on AM processes and post processes
process in which a laser directs two photons of near-infrared light have been used in the current study.
at a photo-polymer resin [74]. However, VP techniques are con-
tinuously evolving to satisfy different engineering and medical de- 3.1. Energy consumption
mands.
In the investigation on environmental impacts of the manufac-
3. Environmental impacts of additive manufacturing processes turing process, the efficient use of energy is considered to be a
key factor. Electrical energy appears to be the largest environmen-
In the development of manufacturing processes, various as- tal impact of AM processes. In mass production, AM requires more
pects, such as concept evaluation, equipment maintenance, and electrical energy in comparison with the injection molding pro-
environmental concerns must be considered. Although production cess; however, this does not apply for sample production [92]. It is
processes affect the environment, clean production, manufacturing noteworthy that energy consumption depends on various parame-
with low environmental impacts, and green products are impor- ters:
tant topics in production process developments [75–79]. However,
• Material:
all manufacturing processes consume energy, utilize materials, and
Currently, various materials can be utilized in AM processes. As
release pollutants. The same applies to AM technologies.
different materials have various densities and heat capacities,
Currently, the life cycle assessment (LCA) and design for envi-
different energies are required in fabrication via AM processes.
ronment (DFE) are two methods used to assess the environmental
Hence, utilizing low-temperature materials present lower en-
impacts of production processes [80,81]. Moreover, other methods
ergy consumption.
have been proposed to evaluate environmental impacts of different
• Build volume:
manufacturing processes over the years [82–84]. Although appli-
This parameter determines the number of components that can
cations of AM technologies have increased substantially in recent
be printed simultaneously on a specific 3D printing machine.
years, suitable metrics and appropriate standards for the environ-
Therefore, printers capable of parallel manufacturing and those
mental impact assessment of AM processes are insufficient. Hence,
that can print more components at once are classified under
previous investigations have resulted in different conclusions [85–
higher energy-efficiency printers.
88]. For instance, in [89], it is reported that AM does not offer
• Layer thickness:
any environmental benefits in the fabrication of high-speed gear,
Low layer thickness is one of the criteria in the fabrication of
whereas in [90], it is concluded that AM demonstrates positive en-
high-quality surfaces. This can be achieved by low-speed print-
vironmental benefits in printing cement-based composites.
ing, which results in a higher energy consumption. Moreover, a
The environmental and health impacts of the AM process are
low layer thickness results in a larger total number of layers in
discussed in a workshop sponsored by the National Science Foun-
the printed components, which increases the energy consump-
dation on October 2014 [91]. In this context, ideas regarding AM
tion.
and its environmental impacts and occupational health have been
• Process speed:
discussed. Many factors affect the environmental impacts of AM
In AM techniques, different process speeds are achievable. Ad-
processes. For instance, layer thickness, process time, and material
ditionally, other parameters such as material and thickness af-
type are important factors affecting the environmental assessment
fect the printing speed. In all AM processes, more energy is
of AM technologies. In the present study, we discuss three aspects
consumed during the longer process, and fast printing reduces
of the environmental impacts of AM: (a) energy consumption, (b)
energy consumption.
waste management, and (c) air pollution (see Fig. 5).
The comparison and analysis of the environmental impacts of In various AM processes, other relevant factors should be con-
AM techniques depend on the availability of LCA data for the pro- sidered to compare the energy consumption. For instance, pow-
6 M.R. Khosravani and T. Reinicke / Applied Materials Today 20 (2020) 100689

Fig. 6. LCA for energy analysis in FDM process.

Table 5 has influence on the energy consumption. The documented data

Energy consumption in various AM processes.
proved that new models are typically more efficient. It is note-
Process Material Machine Energy (KWh/kg) Ref. worthy that the specifications of the parts are not identical in the
PBF Metallic powder EOSINT M250 710 [85] different processes. For example, the lifetime of a part that is pro-
Polyamide Vanguard HiQ 15 [97] duced by the VP process is limited compared to that by production
EOSINT P760 40 [98] via a PBF process. This important issue should be considered for a
VP Epoxy SLA 250 33 [99] reliable analysis.
resin SLA 3000 41
Here, we conclude that because of the sustainability of AM,
SLA 5000 21
FDM ABS FDM 1650 346 [99] which depends on different parameters, a general statement re-
plastic FDM 2000 116 garding the energy consumption of AM processes cannot be made.
FDM 8000 23 Therefore, utilizing an LCA database is necessary for further re-
search.

der density has a significant effect on energy consumption in the
PBF process. In the investigation of energy consumption in AM
processes, different aspects have been considered. For example, in
[93], it is reported that most 3D printing machines are not well
designed for efficient energy consumption. Subsequently, in [94], it
is confirmed that reducing the weight of the printing part is key
factor in reducing energy consumption.
Consumed energy can be considered in three main phases: (a)
pre-heating or machine warm up, (b) printing process, and (c)
cooling process. Utilizing high technology in these phases can re-
duce energy usage; however, a lack of energy-related data hinders
the progress in this field. As the cooling system is crucial in en-
ergy consumption, it is reported in [95] that a highly efficient en-
ergy system can be achieved by improving the cooling system by
integrating cooling channels into the structure.
In the evaluation and analysis of energy consumption in various
AM processes, utilizing the LCA methodology is necessary and ben-
eficial; however, LCA studies in this field are still rare. For instance,
in [96], an LCA was performed to compare the environmental im-
pact of CNC milling and FDM process. However, to obtain compre-
hensive information, different experiments are required, and com-
plete data for an LCA has to be accumulated over time. LCA for
energy analysis in FDM processes is depicted in Fig. 6. In this con-
text, the FDM process is divided into three steps, and each of the
steps involved different energy consumption processes. The heavy
and medium energy consumers are represented with red and blue
, respectively. The rest can be considered as light energy consump-
tion process.
The unit kWh/kg is utilized to compare energy consumptions.
In Table 5 the energy consumption of different AM processes is
presented.
Regarding to the data summarized in Table 5 we conclude that
not only type of material, but also type of 3D printing machine
3.2. Waste materials
As waste material significantly affect the environment, it has
garnered increasing attention in recent years. Currently, global
waste generation is approximately 1.3 billion tons per year and
is expected to increase to 2.2 billion tons by 2025 [100]. Mate-
rial waste management 3D printing can be classified into two cate-
gories: (a) using recycled materials in 3D printers, and (b) recycling
waste materials produced in 3D printing processes. Both of these
activities can significantly reduce the overall environmental impact
of AM. Owing to changes in the material properties post-printing,
the recycling of all types of waste materials in AM is ambiguous;
however, recycling systems for 3D printers is an interesting topic
currently.
Different waste materials can be reused to fabricate new com-
ponents. To utilize recycled materials in AM processes, polymeric
waste can be recycled and used. In fact, various polymers, such
as low density polyethylene (LDPE) and high density polyethylene
(HDPE) can be recycled and used. Currently, not only LDPE and
HDPE, but also high stiffness polymers, such as polypropylene, PLA
and ABS have been recycled via recycling techniques. In fact, these
materials have been successfully recycled into filaments [101]. As
filaments can be used for the 3D printing of polymeric structures,
this type of recycling can avoid the waste of several millions of US
dollars per year.
Plastic waste is sorted according to its resin identification code.
Considering the numerous applications of AM processes and the
increasing demand of 3D printing technology, a recycling code for
3D printed parts should be added. In fact, increasing the plas-
tic material waste generated from different MA processes can
cause difficulties, especially when complex printing is performed.
In Fig. 7 the proposed recycling process for AM technology is illus-
trated. In this context, recycled material is categorized according
 M.R. Khosravani and T. Reinicke / Applied Materials Today 20 (2020) 100689
Fig. 7. The recommended recycling process of waste material in AM.
Table 6
Resin identification code based on ASTM D7611.
Recycling No. Material
1 Polyethylene terephthalate (PET)
2 High-density polyethylene (HDPE)
3 Polyvinyl chloride (PVC)
4 Low-density polyethylene, (LDPE)
5 Polypropylene (PP)
6 Polystyrene (PS)
7 Other plastics (O)
to the resin code and then cut into flakes. The flakes can be uti-
lized as raw material in filament extruders. The produced filaments
must be evaluated via technical standards to guarantee their qual-
ity.
A comparison of AM and traditional manufacturing processes
indicates that AM techniques require highly specific feedstock ma-
terials. This special requirement necessitates specific and addi-
tional steps in material preparation which results in additional en-
vironmental impacts. Meanwhile, utilizing recyclable materials in
AM processes contribute positively to the environment.
In utilizing recycled materials for 3D printers, a filament man-
ufactured from up to 95% of recycled plastic can be realized
[102]. As plastic is melted, chemical bonds between the plastic
molecules are destroyed and become weaker. Therefore, adding a
small amount of original plastic facilitates significantly in produc-
ing a strong material through recycling. As mentioned previously,
waste materials should be categorized according to their resin
identification code, and this sorting is an important step in the re-
cycling process. Under the ASTM resin identification code [103], a
set of symbols is available on plastic products to identify plastic
resins. Its original form is represented by arrows cycling clockwise
and make a triangle that encloses a number. The number denotes
the type of plastic utilized in the product. In Table 6 some details
of ASTM resin identification code are presented.
Recycling waste polymeric materials and converting them to us-
able filaments can be divided into two main steps: (a) cutting the
waste materials into small pieces; (b) melting and extruding with
a suitable filament extruder. Although the first step appears to be
easy, it remains difficult in several cases. In fact, cutting large com-
ponents requires an expensive industrial shredder. Even though 3D
printing waste can be recycled, the best method is to prevent the
generation of waste. In this context, designing components with
7
Applications
Thermoformed sheet polyester fibers
Agricultural pipes playground equipment
Pipis, floring children’s toy
Plastic bags, containers laboratory equipment
Industrial fibers, auto parts food containers
Plastic utensils packaging peanuts
Bottles, headlight lenses safety glasses
minimum support, and eliminating additional supports can signifi-
cantly reduce waste materials.
Although the recycling of waste materials have advanced, limi-
tations still exist that prevent fast developments in recycling waste
materials from 3D printing technologies, including the lack of stan-
dards in material and quality control. Moreover, missing technical
data and skill sharing are crucial factors affecting the recycling of
3D printing waste. Further studies should be conducted to obtain
key solutions for recycling waste materials at home, which can sig-
nificantly improve the sustainability of 3D printing technology.
3.3. Air pollution
Air pollution has become a worldwide issue and has garnered
significant attention over the last several decades. In terms of the
role of AM in air pollution, two primary subdomains exist: (a) air
pollution that is produced by AM processes; (b) reduction of air
pollution in manufacturing using AM. A large portion of industrial
pollution is generated in the manufacturing of components from
raw materials [104]. In detail, 19% of the world’s greenhouse gas
emissions is related to manufacturing processes [105]. Therefore,
the air pollution from these processes must be controlled via uti-
lizing the appropriate and most suitable technologies. Air pollution
varies according to manufacturing processes. Because of the in-
creasing application of AM technologies in academic and industrial
sectors, their role in creating air pollution has become a crucial is-
sue. Hence, the effects of desktop 3D printers on air pollution has
been investigated [106–108]; in fact, the effects of AM processes
on air pollution has been evaluated in special case studies or dis-
cussed in specific situations.
The extrusion process of thermoplastics generates particles and
volatile organic compounds (VOC); some of them are dangerous
8 M.R. Khosravani and T. Reinicke / Applied Materials Today 20 (2020) 100689
and cause harm to the environment and human health. In fact,
they can pose potential health risk of workers. Hence, during the
operation process, personal protective masks and clothing should
be used. VOC emission can be related to the thermal degradation
of polymers and additives. Because many desktop 3D printers are
based on heated thermoplastic extrusion, they can be considered
potentially hazardous for certain indoor environments. In this re-
gard, some research studies have been performed and VOC emis-
sions have been analyzed from different AM processes, such as BJ
and FDM [109–113]; however, no standard test method exist, dif-
ferent results have been reported. A standardized experimental in-
vestigation and analysis is required to compare the results of dif-
ferent studies. Several parameters affect particle emissions: (a) fil-
ament material, (b) extruder temperature, (c) filament color, (d)
build plate heating, and (e) printer model.
During different AM processes, particulate matter, gaseous ma-
terial, and nano particles can be emitted which poses potential
health risks [114,115]. To determine the emissions of these mate-
rials from different 3D printing techniques, a series of experimen-
tal practices is required. Based on the results reported in [116],
FDM can be hazardous because of the high concentration of emit-
ted nanoparticles and aldehydes. It is noteworthy that the particles
emitted during AM processes are nanosized and primarily emit-
ted at the early stage of the printing process. To reduce these
emissions, some suggestions have been proposes, e.g., preparing
enclosed printers, using a ventilation system, and utilizing high-
efficiency particulate air filters. Because 3D printers are currently
used in small enterprises, startups, and classrooms, finding solu-
tions and strategies to reduce health risks in AM processes are ne-
cessitated. A comparison between AM technology and traditional
manufacturing processes revealed that AM processes utilize fewer
harmful chemical materials; however, AM techniques must be used
carefully, and further investigations are required to determine the
toxicity and dangerous effects of VOC in AM processes.
In the subdomain of air pollution reduction using AM, direct
and indirect effects must be considered. Utilizing nontoxic ther-
moplastic materials can be considered as an example of the direct
effect of AM in the reduction of air pollution. Manufacturing com-
ponents closer to the consumer’s location can reduce transporta-
tion, and an improved carbon footprint is an indirect benefit of AM
technology in reducing air pollution.
In AM processes, a wide range of commercially available non-
toxic thermoplastic materials can be used to reduce air pollution
directly. Several parameters and key factors such as material me-
chanical properties, appearance and cost must be considered in the
development of printable materials. Based on material develop-
ments, different organic and biodegradable materials are currently
utilized in AM processes. As these types of materials are eco-
friendly, they can offer environmental benefits. Bio-based polymers
require a lower temperature during the printing process, which re-
sults in a reduction in energy consumption. Biopolymer filaments
are biodegradable, nontoxic and offer financial advantages. In addi-
tion, because most of these materials can be prepared locally, spe-
cial skills are not required; therefore, they can be applied more
widely in the near future. Plastics are not the only materials uti-
lized in 3D printing processes; therefore, perfect green cities and
more livable environments are expected.
AM has been used increasingly by consumers and can revo-
lutionize the transport industry. Although existing studies do not
provide comprehensive data on the effect of AM on logistics and
transportation, the fabrication of parts closer to consumer loca-
tions can significantly affect transportation. In the current study,
we focused on the 3D printing of polymeric components; there-
fore, we refer to [117], which states that owing to the application
of AM technology in the fabrication of metallic aerospace compo-
nents, lightweight design are highly desired, as they can result in
high energy saving (fuel) in aviation industry. As reported in [118],
based on the 3D printing market, CO2 emissions of 130.5–525.5
Mt can be avoided by 2025. Hence, fuel consumption in the avia-
tion industry possesses the largest reduction potential via AM. Al-
though raw materials must be transported in manufacturing via 3D
printing, the long-distance transport of the final product will be re-
duced owing to mini-factories and local print shops. Additionally,
because of the increasing applications of AM, less air cargo is ex-
pected as components can be fabricated when and where they are
required. This results in a decrease in CO2 emissions, which can be
regarded as an indirect effect of AM technology in improving air
quality.
Based on the discussed environmental impacts of AM processes,
important factors, attributes and parameters must be considered in
reducing the environmental impact of AM processes. A few recom-
mendations as presented below.
• Although the fabrication of the parts via 3D printing technology
has lower environmental impacts in many cases, some com-
ponent geometries can be fabricated more efficiently via tradi-
tional manufacturing processes. Hence, selecting an appropriate
manufacturing method is the first step in optimizing environ-
mental impacts.
• As LCA provides a quantitative comparison, LCAs should be
performed for manufacturing processes and different AM tech-
niques. This may provide more insights and single-source met-
rics, in which different effects are normalized. Through a com-
prehensive comparison between traditional manufacturing pro-
cesses and AM, users can understand the priorities.
• Because the type of AM process has an important effect on
energy consumption, in parts fabrication, an appropriate AM
method must be used to reduce energy consumption. In other
words, some processes are more efficient (e.g., SLA). Moreover,
printers based on FDM can be used to fabricate hollow compo-
nents, which reduces energy consumption.
• The processing parameters (e.g., layer thickness) and opera-
tional parameters (e.g., part orientation) are crucial in the en-
vironmental impact of 3D printing technology. Therefore, a set
of suitable operational parameters and optimized process pa-
rameters can result in a significant reduction in environmental
impacts.
• As the chance of a print failing increases when several print-
ings are performed simultaneously FDM, the simultaneous 3D
printings of many components should be avoided. This can re-
duce unnecessary waste materials significantly. However, print-
ing several parts simultaneously can be performed based on
personal expertise and printing facilities.
• Regarding the continuing rapid growth of AM, studies regard-
ing the health impact of air pollution from AM processes must
be performed before 3D printers become more accessible in
homes. This would enable adaptations at an early stage. More-
over, because the toxicological hazards of 3D printing have not
been sufficiently investigated, further studies are necessitated
in this context.
• To compare various results of air pollution measurements of 3D
printers, a standard testing method is required that can deter-
mine indoor air quality. Moreover, we believe that a wide range
of desktop 3D printers should be considered to evaluate their
effects on indoor environments.
• The effects of AM processes on the environment can be reduced
by applying different strategies. For example, (a) using a 3D
printer with the lowest waste material, (b) utilizing recyclable
feedstock, (c) providing a system to return waste materials to
the supplier, and (d) refining the 3D printer setup to achieve
the best quality and minimize waste material.
 M.R. Khosravani and T. Reinicke / Applied Materials Today 20 (2020) 100689
• AM processes can revolutionize the transportation industry be-
cause then manufacturing can be shifted from centralized fac-
tories to consumers’ homes. Therefore, the effects of AM pro-
cesses on transportation should be investigated in the context
of reducing environmental impacts.
• Utilizing green materials in AM can significantly reduce the en-
vironmental impacts of this manufacturing method. Currently,
green materials for AM processes are limited; however, they
can be further developed by policy or development funding.
This opportunity can result in a major reduction in environ-
mental impacts.
Considering the above mentioned suggestions, we believe that a
series of comprehensive comparison studies can significantly help
users with the purchase of the technology. Moreover, based on fair
comparisons, the manufacturers of 3D printers will be more in-
formed regarding the advantages and priorities of their systems,
thereby enabling environmental impacts to be reduced. Additional
studies should be performed to establish specific targets for im-
proving AM environmental impacts.
4. Conclusion
Although the use of 3D printing technology has increased in re-
cent years, its environmental impacts have not been investigated in
detail. In the fabrication of components with traditional methods,
typically a combination of manufacturing processes, such as mold-
ing, casting, bending, and welding is required. The environmental
effects of these processes differ and depend on the manufactured
component. This manufacturing combination is generally not re-
quired in the production of a part through 3D printing technology.
In the current study, the environmental influences of AM pro-
cesses are investigated considering three aspects: energy consump-
tion, waste management, and air pollution.
- Energy consumption in AM processes depends on several pa-
rameters, which may differ according to process. Some pa-
rameters are similar in all AM processes. For instance, im-
proving the resolution in any AM process increases the pro-
duction time, which results in a higher energy consumption.
- Waste material management in AM processes can be per-
formed using various methods based on recycling and
reusing. Recycling waste polymer materials and produc-
ing filaments can significantly reduce environmental im-
pacts. Additionally, more efficient energy consumption can
be achieved by decreasing waste materials in AM processes.
- Regarding 3D printing technology in the reduction of air pol-
lution, direct and indirect effects must be considered. Using
nontoxic materials and biopolymer filaments can be consid-
ered as direct effect of this technology on air pollution. The
capability of 3D printing to manufacture parts closer to con-
sumers and reduce transportation are indirect effects of this
technology on improving air quality.
- Other practical issues such as making spare parts through 3D
printing should be investigated. It has benefit for existing
products which are not supported by their original manufac-
turers. Fabrication of spare parts via 3D printing has a real
potential for prolonging the lifespan of various products.
Although there is a long way to environmentally-friendly manu-
facturing, 3D printing can play an important role in creating a sus-
tainable manufacturing industry. In conclusion, AM affords manu-
facturing and environmental benefits; however, the standard test
methods must be modified to precisely determine and analyze the
effect of each AM process on air quality and the environment.
9
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
This work as part of the project “Smart Production Design
Center” (SmaP) is funded by the European Regional Development
Fund (ERDF) under the program OP EFRE NRW 2014-2020 (EFRE-
0200545).
References
[1] K. S. Boparai, R. Singh, J. S. Chohan, Reference Module in Materials Science
and Materials Engineering, Elsevier.
[2] , ISO/ASTM52900 - 15 Standard Terminology for Additive Manufacturing -
General Principles - Terminology, Standard, American Society for Testing Ma-
terials, West Conshohocken, USA, 2015.
[3] V. Juechter, M.M. Franke, T. Merenda, A. Stichc, C. Körner, R.F. Singer, Addi-
tive manufacturing of Ti-45Al-4Nb-C by selective electron beam melting for
automotive applications, Addit. Manuf. 22 (2018) 118–126.
[4] R. Leal, F.M. Barreiros, L. Alves, F. Romeiro, J.C. Vasco, M. Santos, C. Marto,
Additive manufacturing tooling for the automotive industry, Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technol. 92 (2017) 1671–1676.
[5] K.V.P. Reddy, I.M. Mirzana, A.K. Reddy, Application of additive manufactur-
ing technology to an aerospace component for better trade-off’s, Mater. Today
Proc. 5 (2018) 3895–3902.
[6] L. Kong, A. Ambrosi, M.Z.M. Nasir, J. Guan, M. Pumera, Self-propelled
3D-printed aircraft carrier of light-powered smart micromachines for
large-volume nitroaromatic explosives removal, Adv. Funct. Mater. 19 (2019)
1–9.
[7] R. Magisetty, N.S. Cheekuramelli, Additive manufacturing technology empow-
ered complex electromechanical energy conversion devices and transformers,
Appl. Mater. Today 14 (2019) 35–50.
[8] A.B. Varotsis, X. Han, R.A. Harris, D.S. Engstrom, Ultrasonic additive manufac-
turing using feedstock with build-in circuitry for 3D metal embedded elec-
tronics, Addit. Maunf. 29 (2019) 100799.
[9] A.A. Alsheghri, O. Alageel, M.A. Mezour, B. Sun, S. Yue, F. Tamimi,
J. Song, Bio-inspired and optimized interlocking features for strengthening
metal/polymer interfaces in additively manufactured prostheses, Acta Bio-
mater. 80 (2018) 425–434.
[10] R. Galante, C.G. Figueiredo-Pina, A.P. Serro, Additive manufacturing of ceram-
ics for dental applications: a review, Dent. Mater. 35 (2019) 825–846.
[11] A. Lelapi, N. Lammerns, W.V. Paepegem, M. Forward, J.P. Deckers, M. Verman-
del, M. De Beule, A validated computational framework to evaluate the stiff-
ness of 3D printed ankle foot orthoses, Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed.
Eng. 22 (2018) 808–887.
[12] X. Feng, B. Ma, M. Xu, D. Zhai, Y. Liu, J. Xue, J. Chang, C. Wu, Three-dimen-
sional printing of scaffolds with synergistic effects of micro nano surfaces and
hollow channels for bone regeneration, ACS Biomater. Sci. Eng. x (2020) 1–9.
[13] Z. Weng, J. Wang, T. Senthil, L. Wu, Mechanical and thermal properties
of ABS/montmorillonite nanocomposites for fused deposition modeling 3D
printing, Mater. Des. 102 (2019) 276–283.
[14] A.T. Miller, D.L. Safranski, K.E. Smith, D.G. Sycks, R.E. Guldberg, K. Gall, Fa-
tigue of injection molded and 3D printed polycarbonate urethane in solution,
Polymer 108 (2017) 121–134.
[15] H. Kim, G.H. Yang, C.H. Choi, Y.S. Cho, G.H. Kim, Gelatin/PVA scaffolds fabri-
cated using a 3D-printing process employed with a low-temperature plate for
hard tissue regeneration: fabricationand characterizations, Int. J. Biol. Macro-
mol. 120 (2018) 119–127.
[16] R.C. Nonato, L.H.I. Mei, B.C. Bonse, E.F. Chinaglia, A.R. Morales, Nanocompos-
ites of PLA containing ZnO nanofibers made by solvent cast 3D printing: pro-
duction and characterization, Eur. Polym. J. 114 (2019) 271–278.
[17] A. Zolfagharian, M.R. Khosravani, A. Kaynak, Fracture resistance analysis of
3D-printed polymers, Polymers 12 (2020) 1–18.
[18] J.R.C. Dizon, A.H. Espera, Q. Chen, R.C. Advincula, Mechanical characterization
of 3D-printed polymers, Addit. Manuf. 20 (2018) 44–67.
[19] B. Core, 3D printing 2019–2029: technology and market analysis, IDTechEx,
2019.
[20] Y. Zhang, H. Sahasrabudhe, A. Bandyopadhyay, Additive manufacturing of
Ti-Si-N ceramic coatings on titanium, Appl. Surf. Sci. 346 (2015) 428–437.
[21] V.B. Mohan, B.J. Krebs, D. Bhattacharyya, Development of novel highly con-
ductive 3D printable hybrid polymer-graphene composites, Mater. Today
Commun. 17 (2018) 554–561.
10 M.R. Khosravani and T. Reinicke / Applied Materials Today 20 (2020) 100689
[22] E.H.Z. Ho, A. Ambrosi, M. Pumera, Additive manufacturing of electrochemi-
cal interfaces: simultaneous detection of biomarkers, Appl. Mater. Today 12
(2019) 43–50.
[23] C. Oztan, S. Ballikaya, U. Ozgun, R. Karkkainen, E. Celik, Additive manufac-
turing of thermoelectric materials via fused filament fabrication, Appl. Mater.
Today 15 (2019) 77–82.
[24] T. DebRoy, H.L. Wei, J.S. Zuback, T. Mukherjee, J.W. Elmer, J.O. Milewski,
A.M. Beese, A. Wilson-Heid, A. De, W. Zhang, Additive manufacturing of
metallic components - process, structure and properties, Prog. Mater. Sci. 92
(2018) 112–224.
[25] S.M. Sajadi, P.S. Owuor, R. Vajtai, J. Lou, R.S. Ayyagari, C.S. Tiwary, P.M. Ajayan,
Boxception: impact resistance structure using 3D printing, Adv. Eng. Mater. 21
(2019) 1–10.
[26] S. Sultan, H.N. Abdelhamid, X. Zou, A.P. Mathew, CelloMOF: nanocellulose en-
abled 3D printing of metal organic frameworks, Adv. Funct. Mater. 29 (2019)
1–12.
[27] Y. Chang, J. Jiang, W. Chen, W. Yang, L. Chen, P. Chen, J. Shen, S. Qian,
T. Zhou, L. Wu, L. Hong, Y. Huang, F. Li, Biomimetic metal-organic nanopar-
ticles prepared with a 3D-printed microfluidic device as a novel formula-
tion for disulfiram-based therapy against breast cancer, Appl. Mater. Today
19 (2019) 100492.
[28] V.B. Mohan, D. Bhattacharyya, Mechanical, electrical and thermal perfor-
mance of hybrid polyethylene-graphene nanoplatelets-polypyrrole compos-
ites: a comparative analysis of 3D printed and compression molded samples,
Polymer Plst. Tchnol. Mater. 1 (2019) 1–17.
[29] M.P. Browne, M. Pumera, Impurities in graphene/PLA 3D-printing filaments
dramatically influence the electrochemical properties of the devices, Chem.
Commun. 55 (2019) 8374–8377.
[30] H. Zhuang, R. Lin, Y. Liu, M. Zhang, D. Zhai, Z. Huan, C. Wu, Three-dimen-
sional-printed bioceramic scaffolds with osteogenic activity for simultane-
ous photo/magnetothermal therapy of bone tumors, ACS Biomater. Sci. Eng.
5 (2019) 6725–6734.
[31] M.R. Khosravani, T. Reinicke, 3D-printed sensors: current progress and future
challenges, Sens. Actuators A 305 (2020) 111916.
[32] America makes technology roadmap (version 2.0): standardization roadmap
for additive manufacturing, http://ammo.ncms.org/. Accessed: 02.10. 2019.
[33] Additive manufacturing aiming towards zero waste & efficient produc-
tion of high-tech metal products, https://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/105484/
factsheet/en. Accessed: 02.10. 2019.
[34] 3D printed metal mutants arise from Europe’s AMAZE programme, http:
//www.esa.int/OurActivities. Accessed: 02.10. 2019.
[35] A. Garg, J.S.L. Lam, M.M. Savalani, Laser power based surface characteristics
models for 3-D printing process, J. Intell. Manuf. 29 (2018) 1191–1202.
[36] J. Faludi, C.M.V. Sice, Y. Shi, J. Bower, O.M.K. Brooks, Novel materials can rad-
ically improve whole-system environmental impacts of additive manufactur-
ing, J. Cleaner Prod. 212 (2019) 1580–1590.
[37] D. Böckin, A.M. Tillman, Environmental assessment of additive manufacturing
in the automotive industry, J. Cleaner Prod. 226 (2019) 977–987.
[38] R. Bogue, 3-D printing: the dawn of a new era in manufacturing? Assy. Au-
tom. 33 (2013) 307–311.
[39] Y. He, F. Zhang, E. Saleh, J. Vaithilingam, N. Aboulkhair, B. Begines, C.J. Tuck,
R.J.M. Hauge, I.A. Ashcroft, R.D. Wildman, A tripropylene glycol diacry-
late-based polymeric support ink for material jetting, Addit. Manuf. 16 (2017)
153–161.
[40] T.D. Ngo, A. Kashani, G. Imbalzano, K.T.Q. Nguyen, D. Hui, Additive manufac-
turing (3D printing): a review of materials, methods,applications and chal-
lenges, Compos. Part B 143 (2018) 172–796.
[41] H. Guo, R. Lv, S. Bai, Recent advances on 3D printing graphene-based com-
posites, Nano Mater. Sci. 1 (2019) 101–115.
[42] T. Yao, Z. Deng, K. Zhang, S. Li, A method to predict the ultimate tensile
strength of 3D printing polylactic acid (PLA) materials with different print-
ing orientations, Composites Part B 163 (2019) 393–402.
[43] N. Hopkinson, R.J.M. Hague, P.M. Dickens, Rapid Manufacturing: An Industrial
Revolution for the Digital Age, Wiley, 2006.
[44] N.T. Nguyen, X. Huang, T.K. Chuan, MEMS-micropumps: a review, J. Fluid Eng.
124 (2002) 384–392.
[45] M. Ziaee, N.B. Crane, Binder jetting: a review of process, materials, and meth-
ods, Addit. Manuf. 28 (2019) 781–801.
[46] S. Crump, Fast, precise, safe prototype with FDM, ASME-PED 50 (1991) 53–60.
[47] S.M. Sajadi, P.S. Owuor, S. Schara, C.F. Woellner, V. Rodrigues, R. Vajtai, J. Lou,
D.S. Galvao, C.S. Tiwary, P.M. Ajayan, Multiscale geometric design principles
applied to 3D printed schwarzites, Adv. Mater. 30 (2018) 1–8.
[48] M.P. Browne, F. Novotný, Z. Sofer, M. Pumera, 3D printed graphene elec-
trodes electrochemical activation, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 10 (2018)
10301–40294.
[49] E.R. Fitzharris, D.W. Rosen, M.L. Shofner, Fast scanning calorimetry for
semicrystalline polymers in fused deposition modeling, Polymer. 166 (2019)
196–205.
[50] M.R. Khosravani, A. Zolfagharian, Fracture and load-carrying capacity of
3D-printed cracked components, Extreme Mech. Lett. 37 (2020) 100692.
[51] S.M. Thompson, L. Bian, N. Shamsaei, A. Yadollahi, An overview of direct laser
deposition for additive manufacturing; part i: transport phenomena, model-
ing and diagnostics, Addit. Manuf. 8 (2015) 36–62.
[52] C. Zhang, M. Gao, C. Chen, X. Zeng, Spectral diagnosis of wire arc additive
manufacturing of Al alloys, Addit. Manuf. 30 (2019) 100869.
[53] J.M. Wilson, N. Jones, L. Jin, Y.C. Shin, Laser deposited coatings of Co-CrMo
onto Ti6A14V and SS316L substrates for biomedical applications, J. Biomed.
Mater. Res. B. 101 (2013) 1124–1132.
[54] A. Ashish, N. Ahmad, P. Gopinath, A. Vinogradov, 3D Printing Technology in
Nanomedicine, Elsevier.
[55] A. Dass, A. Moridi, State of the art in directed energy deposition: from addi-
tive manufacturing to materials design, Coatings 9 (2019) 1–26.
[56] J. Mueller, K. Shea, Buckling, build orientation, and scaling effects in 3D
printed lattices, Mater. Today Commun. 17 (2018) 69–75.
[57] F. Zhang, E. Saleh, J. Vaithilinga, Z. Li, C.J. Tuck, R.J.M. Hague, R.D. Wildman,
Y. He, Reactive material jetting of polyimide insulators for complex circuit
board design, Addit. Manuf. 25 (2019) 477–484.
[58] M. Molitch-Hou, Additive Manufacturing: Materials, Processes, Quantifications
and Applications, Elsevier.
[59] P.M. Bhatt, A.M. Kabir, M. Peralta, H.A. Bruck, S.K. Gupa, A robotic cell for
performing sheet lamination-based additive manufacturing, Addit. Manuf. 27
(2019) 278–289.
[60] I. Gibson, D. Rosen, B. Stucker, Additive Manufacturing Technologies, 3D Print-
ing, Rapid Prototyping, and Direct Digital Manufacturing, Springer, 2015.
[61] R. Goodrige, S. Ziegelmeier, Laser Additive Manufacturing: Material, Design,
Technologies, and Applications, Woodhead Publishing Series.
[62] Z. Snow, R. Martukanitz, S. Joshi, On the development of powder spreadability
metrics and feedstock requirements for powder bed fusion additive manufac-
turing, Addit. Manuf. 28 (2019) 78–86.
[63] H. Zhang, D. Gu, C. Ma, M. Xia, M. Guo, Surface wettability and superhy-
drophobic characteristics of Ni-based nanocomposites fabricated by selective
laser melting, Appl. Surf. Sci. 476 (2019) 151–160.
[64] J. Trapp, A.M. Rubenchik, G. Guss, M.J. Matthews, In situ absorptivity mea-
surements of metallic powders during laser powder-bed fusion additive man-
ufacturing, Appl. Mater. Today 9 (2017) 341–349.
[65] W. Gao, Y. Zhang, D. Ramanujan, K. Ramani, Y. Chen, C.B. Williams, C.L. Wang,
Y.C. Shin, S. Zhang, P.D. Zavattieri, The status, challenges, and future of addi-
tive manufacturing in engineering, Comput.-Aided Des. 69 (2015) 65–89.
[66] S. Bose, D. Ke, H. Sahasrabudhe, A. Bandyopadhyay, Additive manufacturing
of biomaterials, Prog. Mater Sci. 93 (2018) 45–111.
[67] F.P.W. Melchels, J. Feijen, D.W. Gripma, A review on stereolithography and its
applications in biomedical engineering, Biomaterials 31 (2010) 6121–6130.
[68] Y.L. Cheng, F. Chen, Preparation and characterization of photocured poly
(ε -caprolactone) diacrylate/poly (ethylene glycol) diacrylate/chitosan for pho-
topolymerization-type 3D printing tissue engineering scaffold application,
Mater. Sci. Eng. C. 81 (2017) 66–73.
[69] J.Y. Lee, J. An, C.K. Chua, Fundamentals and applications of 3D printing for
novel materials, Appl. Mater. Today 7 (2017) 120–133.
[70] D.C. Aduba Jr, E.D. Margaretta, A.E.C. Marnot, K.V. Heifferon, W.R. Surbey,
N.A. Chartrain, A.R. Whittington, T.E. Long, C.B. Williams, Vat photopolymer-
ization 3D printing of acid-cleavable PEG-methacrylate networks for bioma-
terial applications, Mater. Today Commun. 19 (2019) 204–211.
[71] Carbon 3D Materials, http://www.carbon3d.com/materials. Accessed: 08.10.
2019.
[72] Siemens, https://www.plm.automation.siemens.com. Accessed: 08.10. 2019.
[73] 3Diligent: Digital Manufacturing, https://www.3diligent.com/. Accessed:
08.10. 2019.
[74] Photonic Professional GT, Nanoscribe GmbH, http://www.nanoscribe.com/en/
solutions/quantum-x. Accessed: 08.10. 2019.
[75] V.K. Takur, H. Wang, Green Composites from Natural Resources, CRC Press,
2013.
[76] N. Singh, R. Singh, I.P.S. Ahuja, Recycling of polymer waste with SiC/Al2 O3
reinforcement for rapid tooling applications, Mater. Today Commun. 15 (2018)
124–127.
[77] I.M. Ammar, M.R.M. Huzaifah, S.M. Sapuan, Z. Leman, M.R. Ishak, Mechani-
cal properties of environment-friendly sugar palm fibre reinforced vinyl ester
composites at different fibre arrangements, Environ. Asia 12 (2019) 25–35.
[78] H. Moustafa, A.M. Youssef, N.A. Darwish, A.I. Abou-Kandil, Eco-friendly poly-
mer composites for green packaging: future vision and challenges, Compos.
Part B 172 (2019) 16–25.
[79] M. Gillono, I. Roppolo, F. Frascella, L. Scaltrito, C.F. Pirri, A. Chiappone, Co per-
meability control in 3D printed light responsive structures, Appl. Mater. Today
x (2019) 100470.
[80] R. Venkata Rao, Decision Making in the Manufacturing Environment, Springer,
2016.
[81] M.R. Mansor, M.T. Mastura, S.M. Sapuan, A.Z. Zainudin, Durability and Life
Prediction in Biocomposites, Fibre-Reinforced Composites and Hybrid Com-
posites, Woodhead Publishing.
[82] H. Paris, H. Mokhtarian, E. Coatanea, M. Museau, I.F. Ituarte, Comparative en-
vironmental impacts of additive and subtractive manufacturing technologies,
CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 65 (2016) 29–32.
[83] V.T. Le, H. Paris, G. Mandil, Environmental impact assessment of an innovative
strategy based on an additive and subtractive manufacturing combination, J.
Cleaner Prod. 164 (2017) 508–523.
[84] M. Kumar, M. Mani, A systems-based sustainability assessment framework to
capture active impacts in product life cycle/manufacturing, Procedia Manuf.
33 (2019) 654–674.
[85] P. Mognol, D. Lepicart, N. Perry, Rapid prototyping: energy and environment
in the spotlight, Rapid Proto. J. 12 (2006) 26–34.
[86] K. Kellens, R. Renaldi, W. Dewulf, J. Kruth, J.R. Duflou, Environmental im-
pact modeling of selective laser sintering processes, Rapid Proto. J. 20 (2014)
459–470.
 M.R. Khosravani and T. Reinicke / Applied Materials Today 20 (2020) 100689
[87] S. Kumar, A. Czekanski, Roadmap to sustainable plastic additive manufactur-
ing, Mater. Today Commun. 15 (2018) 109–113.
[88] M. Yosofi, O. Kerbrat, P. Mognol, Framework to combine technical, economic
and environmental points of view of additive manufacturing processes, Pro-
cedia CIRP 69 (2018) 118–123.
[89] Z. Liu, Q. Jiang, W. Cong, T. Li, H.C. Zhang, Comparative study for environmen-
tal performances of traditional manufacturing and directed energy deposition
processes, Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 15 (2018) 2273–2282.
[90] W.J. Long, J.L. Tao, C. Lin, Y.C. Gu, L. Mei, H.B. Duan, F. Xing, Rheology and
buildability of sustainable cement-based composites containing micro-crys-
talline cellulose for 3D-printing, J. Cleaner Prod. 239 (2019) 118054.
[91] D. Rejeski, Y. Huang, Environmental and Health Impacts of Additive Manufac-
turing, An NSF Workshop Report, 2015.
[92] N. Shahrubudin, T.C. Lee, R. Ramlan, An overview on 3D printing technol-
ogy: technological, materials, and applications, Procedia Manuf. 35 (2019)
1286–1296.
[93] F. Walachowicz, I. Bernsdorf, U. Papernfuss, C. Zeller, A. Graichen, V. Navrot-
sky, N. Rajvanshi, C. Kiener, Comparative energy, resource and recycling life-
cycle analysis of the industrial repair process of gas turbine burners using
conventional machining and additive manufacturing, J. Ind. Ecol. 21 (2017)
203–215.
[94] T. Kamps, M. Lutter-Guenther, C. Seidel, T. Gutowski, G. Reinhart, Cost- and
energy-efficient manufacture of gears by laser beam melting, CIRP J. Manuf.
Sci. Technol. 21 (2018) 47–60.
[95] S. Ford, M. Despeisse, Additive manufacturing and sustainability: an ex-
ploratory study of the advantages and challenges, J. Cleaner Prod. 137 (2016)
1573–1587.
[96] J. Faludi, C. Bayley, S. Bhogal, M. Iribane, Comparing environmental impacts
of additive manufacturing vs traditional machining via life-cycle assessment,
Rapid Proto. J. 21 (2015) 14–33.
[97] R. Sreenivasan, A. Goel, D.L. Bourell, Sustainability issues in laser-based addi-
tive manufacturing, Phys. Procedia 5 (2010) 81–90.
[98] K. Kellens, E. Yasa, W. Rendaldi, W. Dewulf, J.P. Kruth, J.R. Duflou, Energy
and resource efficiency of SLS/SLM processes, in: Proceedings of the Solid
Freeform Fabrication Symposium, Austin, USA, 2011, pp. 1–16.
[99] Y. Luo, M.C. Leu, Z. Li, Assessment of environmental performance of rapid
prototyping and rapid tooling process, in: Proceedings of the Solid Freeform
Fabrication Symposium, Austin, USA, 1999, pp. 783–791.
[100] D. Hoornweg, P. Bhada-Tata, What a Waste: A Global Review of Solid Waste
Management, World Bank, 2012.
[101] K.R. Hart, J.B. Frketic, J.R. Brown, Recycling meal-ready-to-eat (MRE) pouches
into polymer filament for material extrusion additive manufacturing, Addit.
Manuf. 21 (2018) 536–543.
[102] 3D Printing Industry, https://3dprintingindustry.com/. Accessed: 11.11. 2019.
11
[103] , ASTM D7611 - 18 Standard Practice for Coding Plastic Manufactured Arti-
cles for Resin Identification, Standard, American Society for Testing Materials,
West Conshohocken, USA, 2018.
[104] D. Vallero, Fundamentals of Air Pollution, Elsevier, 2014.
[105] N. Diaz, E. Redelsheimer, D. Dornfeld, Energy consumption characterization
and reduction strategies for milling machine tool use, 2010, (Laboratory for
Manufacturing and Sustainability, University of California, Berkeley).
[106] Y. Zhou, X. Kong, A. Chen, S. Cao, Investigation of ultrafine particle emissions
of desktop 3D printers in the clean room, Procedia Eng. 121 (2015) 506–512.
[107] S. Wujtyla, P. Klama, K. Spiewak, T. Baran, 3D printer as a potential source of
indoor air pollution, Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 17 (2019) 1–12.
[108] J. Gu, M. Wensing, E. Uhde, T. Salthammer, Characterization of particulate and
gaseous pollutants emitted during operation of a desktop 3D printer, Environ.
Int. 123 (2019) 476–485.
[109] B. Stephens, P. Azimi, Z.E. Orch, T. Ramos, Ultrafine particle emissions from
desktop 3D printers, Atmos. Environ. 79 (2013) 334–339.
[110] N. Afshar Mohajer, C.Y. Wu, T. Ladun, D.A. Rajon, Y. Huang, Characterization of
particulate matters and total VOC emissions from a binder jetting 3D printer,
Build. Environ. 93 (2015) 293–301.
[111] P. Azimi, D. Zhao, C. Pouzet, N.E. Crain, B. Stephens, Emissions of ultrafine
particles and volatile organic compounds from commercially available desk-
top three-dimensional printers with multiple filaments, Environ. Sci. Technol.
50 (2016) 1260–1268.
[112] Q. Zhang, J.P.S. Wong, A.Y. Davis, M.S. Black, R.J. Weber, Characterization of
particle emissions from consumer fused deposition modeling 3D printers,
Aerosol Sci. Technol. 51 (2017) 1275–1287.
[113] P. Byrley, B.J. George, W.K. Boyes, K. Rogers, Particle emissions from fused
deposition modeling 3D printers: evaluation and meta-analysis, Sci. Total En-
viron. 655 (2019) 395–407.
[114] Y. Deng, S. Cao, A. Chen, Y. Guo, The impact of manufacturing parameters on
submicron particle emissions from a desktop 3D printer in the perspective of
emission reduction, Build. Environ. 104 (2016) 311–319.
[115] A.Y. Davis, Q. Zhang, J.P.S. Wong, R.J. Weber, M.S. Black, Characterization of
volatile organic compound emissions from consumer level material extrusion
3D printers, Build. Environ. 160 (2019) 106209.
[116] Y. Kim, C. Yoon, S. Ham, J. Park, S. Kim, O. Kwon, P.J. Tsai, Emissions of
nanoparticles and gaseous material from 3D printer operation, Environ. Sci.
Technol. 49 (2015) 12044–12053.
[117] T. Peng, K. Kellens, R. Tang, C. Chen, G. Chen, Sustainability of additive manu-
facturing: an overview on its energy demand and environmental impact, Ad-
dit. Manuf. 21 (2018) 694–704.
[118] M. Gebler, A.J.M.S. Uiterkamp, C. Visser, A global sustainability perspective on
3D printing technologies, Energy Policy 74 (2014) 158–167.