Circular Economy Archives - Perfect 3D Printing Filament

6K Partners with Relativity Space, Commissions UniMelt to Transform Sustainability in Metal 3D Printing

On the heels of their recent announcement of commissioning the first two commercial UniMelt systems for sustainable production of additive manufacturing (AM) powders, 6K has now partnered with Relativity Space to explore sustainability in AM production for rocket manufacturing and space travel.

Relativity’s Terran 1 – rocket parts will be built in a reportedly sustainable manner using 6K’s proprietary technology, image courtesy of Relativity Space.

The partnership with Relativity Space expands on the sustainability focus in metal AM, reimagining the aerospace supply chain. Relativity will look to provide 6K with certified scrap materials, used powder or parts, which can be recycled into premium powder that will then be reprinted by Relativity for final production parts suitable for rocket launch and space travel applications. The pioneering aerospace manufacturer is not only creating an autonomous factory to additively manufacture an entire rocket, from raw material to launch-ready, in just 60 days, but is also looking to do it by reusing materials. 6K will bring sustainability to Relativity’s unique supply chain, and ensure closed loop traceability in production.

Commenting on the landmark partnership, Dr.Aaron Bent, CEO of 6K, said:

“Relativity is pushing the boundaries of additive manufacturing by 3D printing a complete rocket and we see this partnership as a natural extension of their forward thinking practice. Our ability to turn their used powder and parts into premium powder through the UniMelt process provides them with a sustainable source for AM powder. We are proud to be partnering with Relativity to explore ways to increase sustainability, recycling and environmentally responsible manufacturing processes, which the entire AM industry is uniquely posed to be able to integrate into standard practices.”

Relativity is continuing to build key partnerships as it prepares to launch the world’s first entirely 3D printed rocket, Terran 1, in 2021, and recently signed a public-private infrastructure partnership with the US Airforce to use the latter’s launch site facility in Southern California.

Customers from key industries of automotive, manufacturing, aerospace and more, are increasingly looking to improve their supply chain efficiencies and shift towards more sustainable production. In shifting towards ‘green’ manufacturing, AM material suppliers are looking for ways to use domestic, reusable sources for AM powder production. While AM itself is often seen as a sustainable manufacturing method, the production of AM powders hasn’t been near sustainable, generating large amounts of waste to produce a small quantity of much-needed premium quality AM powders.

6K, a developer and supplier of advanced materials, is transforming the production of AM powders with its UniMelt system, which is the world’s only microwave plasma system for production. The system, which produces three to four times the yield of gas atomization, not only allows 6K to create highly uniform powders with the requisite properties, but also to tailor the powder to the specific AM process it will be used for.

Outlining the range of materials the system can produce, 6K stated that UniMelt is capable of producing:

“a highly uniform and precise plasma zone with zero contamination, and capable of high throughput production of advanced materials including Onyx In718 and Onyx Ti64 AM powders. 6K’s UniMelt technology can also spheroidize ferrous alloys like SS17-4PH, SS316, other nickel superalloys including Inconel 625, HX, cobalt-base alloys like CoCr, refractory metals like Mo, W, Re, reactive alloys such as Ti-6-4, TiAl, Al alloys as well as high-temperature ceramics such as MY and YSZ.”

6K’s proprietary UniMelt system that produces premium metal AM powders at 100% yield, image courtesy 6K

The company recently commissioned two commercial UniMelt production lines at its 40,000 square foot plant in Pennsylvania, USA, with each to produce 100 tones per year of nickel super alloys and titanium powders. This could represent a significant milestone in AM sustainability, in both its processes and applications for existing and new metal powders.

At Formnext 2019, 6K launched its Onyx In718 and Onyx Ti64 materials which, after internal product qualification and 3^rd party printing, will begin customer sampling in the latter half of this year. Additional UniMelt systems will be commissioned throughout 2021 to meet anticipated demand for premium metal AM powders. The company is also looking to certify its plant as a sustainable manufacturing factory, as a recent member of MESA’s association for sustainable manufacturing.

“The commissioning of the first commercial UniMelt systems is the culmination of terrific work by experts in manufacturing, process and materials at both 6K Additive and our parent company 6K,” said Frank Roberts, President of 6K Additive. “Customers and strategic partners have been eager to sample and use our Onyx powders and we’re ready to deliver. Accompanying the new UniMelt systems, the new facility encompasses automated manufacturing equipment and industry leading safety and health systems that confirm our organization is hitting our production goals while ensuring the utmost in safety for our employees.”

UniMelt’s high frequency microwave plasma, image courtesy 6K

Through 6K Additive, its division focused on AM material solutions, the company aims at the production of ultra-high quality metal powders, at scale, at low cost with more than nine times the efficiency of existing plasma processes, the company claims. 6K (which stands for 6000K, the approximate temperature of the UniMelt plasma system and the temperature of the Sun) also enables the development of alloy powders with unusual properties, combining different types of metals that could not be mixed before, and producing previously thought “impossible” materials for 3D printing production. ‘Unobtainium’, is an alloy made by 6K which was previously considered impossible to obtain or produce, that combines six different metals including copper, iron, nickel, titanium among others.

This is because 6K’s microwave plasma process is the only process that can achieve the combination of high entropy metals, enabling the production of rare, unexpected alloy powders for metal AM. What’s most interesting though is that 6K’s microwave plasma platform converts certified chemistry machine millings, turnings, previously used powders, discarded parts, and other recyclable feedstock into high-quality AM powders. This means that any machined alloy could potentially be processed into reusable premium metal AM powder with specific properties.

6K’s unique technology could accelerate the trend towards a circular economy in metal AM, image courtesy 6K

6K may be transforming the business case for powder-bed and sintering applications in critical areas of cost, efficiency, sustainability and capabilities. This could accelerate the shift towards a circular economy in metal AM, despite greater short-term impacts in metal AM markets (as compared to polymer) this year due to COVID-19, and could also strengthen mid to long-term demand for metal AM solutions – perhaps growing the market beyond a projected $11 billion by 2024 (as per SmarTech’s latest AM Metal Powders 2019 report).

The post 6K Partners with Relativity Space, Commissions UniMelt to Transform Sustainability in Metal 3D Printing appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

Climate Disrupted: A Circular Economy

In trying to prevent the total collapse of our natural ecosystem, we can work toward building a circular ecosystem of goods production and consumption. The goal of a circular economy is to produce no waste and have no negative impact on our ecosystem.

At the moment, we have very minor hints at a circular economy in the additive manufacturing (AM) space in the form of recycled feedstock and feedstock recyclers.

Recycled Feedstock

On the market, it is already possible to purchase 3D printing filament from a number of brands, including Innofil3D (now a BASF company), 3D Fuel and others. These companies manufacture filaments made from waste products. While ABS is recycled from car parts, PET is recycled from plastic bottles and HIPS can be scavenged from old refrigerators.

3D Fuel’s Buzzed filament made from waste generated during beer making. Image courtesy of 3D Fuel.

3D Fuel is one of the more notable companies in the space due to the wide range of waste-based plastic it manufactures. This includes waste byproducts from the beer, cotton and coffee industries, as well as biochar derived from the pyrolysis of landfill waste. All of these materials are then combined with NatureWorks PLA to give second lives to what would otherwise rot in giant piles somewhere.

Because many desktop 3D printing filaments are meant for low-cost machines, it might be safe to say that this helps offset the waste produced for prototyping and visual modeling. In general, 3D printing is still used for these applications, even as a shift toward production is taking place. As the technology is deployed for end part manufacturing, however, it is important to understand the reusability of materials in production systems.

HP, for instance, offers several materials that are 70 to 80 percent reusable. In powder bed fusion technologies, not all unprinted powder from a build can be reused due to exposure to the sintering/fusing source. In the case of HP’s materials, that amount is limited to just 20 to 30 percent.

Feedstock Recyclers

The aforementioned materials are obviously a small fraction of the possibilities for manufacturing with recycled feedstocks. A step further is the use of material recyclers that can be used to shred used plastic and remelt it into new, usable filament. Those with access to extrusion 3D printers can build recyclers like Michigan Tech’s RecycleBot at home or purchase a system like the Filabot or Felfil Evo.

A Gigabot X 3D printer modified with a 3D-printed hopper. Image courtesy of Michigan Tech.

There are good arguments to be had about whether or not such a system could even exist in industrialized society because of the destructive nature of recycling. Waste that is recycled can only be put through such a process a given number of times before its quality is too low for continued re-use. According to research from the Michigan Technical University Open Sustainability Technology (MOST) group, recycled plastic filament can only last five recycling cycles before it becomes unusable.

However, the MOST group is trying to overcome these issues. The lab is working to improve the quality of recycled plastic feedstock by replacing a plastic filament extruder with a hopper for processing shredded plastic. The research demonstrated that recycled ABS, PET and PP had similar tensile strength to virgin plastic filaments. PLA, however, was 2.5 percent weaker.

Circular Economy

If we were able to maintain quality throughout recycling, we can imagine how 3D printing could become a manufacturing process of choice for a circular economy. In a form of what the MOST lab refers to as “industrial symbiosis,” waste byproducts from one production site could be used as the material feedstock for another.

While other manufacturing technologies might be deployed in such a scenario, 3D printing has the advantage of producing less material waste than subtractive technologies such as CNC machining. It also has the benefit of cost effectively fabricating objects on-demand, eliminating the need for warehousing extra goods made with mass manufacturing technologies like injection molding.

An eco-industrial park centered on a photovoltaic manufacturing plant. Image courtesy of Renewable Energy.

The MOST group detailed the possibilities of a symbiotic eco-industrial park used to manufacture solar panels in a study. The calculations suggested that raw material use could be cut by 30,000 tons annually and embodied energy use could be cut by 220,000 GJ annually.

For the journal sustainability, a team of UK researchers attempted to conceive of a way to incorporate a number of emerging technologies, including AM, into a circular economic model. Using the production of shoes as an example, the team illustrated the production of shoes in a circular economy in this way:

“The design of this pair of trainers allows new disruptive business models, such as offering trainers as a service through a subscription model. This model provides a personalized service if the trainers need to be repaired, maintained, or parts need to be replaced, as the main body detaches from the sole with a mechanical joint. In addition, trainers will be produced in local stores. The model also includes the use of other technologies such as the ability to scan your foot to produce every trainer to measure and an augmented reality application to virtually try the trainers on. These technologies will allow the custom production of trainers avoiding a surplus of unsold products and utilizing the minimal amount of material.”

This second example in particular (as opposed to the solar park envisioned by the MOST lab) suffers from a lack of imagination, in that it attempts to maintain our current global society as much as possible. Our current economic, social and technological order are what have generated all of the ecological crises we are facing in the first place.

If we are to maintain a society with any level of industrialization that we currently have, it may be necessary to avoid thinking in terms of individual “consumers” purchasing goods as they always have, albeit locally and with a subscription model, and begin thinking about what aspects of this industrial society are necessary and which are merely convenient.

The post Climate Disrupted: A Circular Economy appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

Microsoft Community Pitch-Off: Turning Plastic Waste Into Educational Supplies with 3D Printing

People across the globe are harnessing the power of new technologies in a search for sustainable, low-cost, and localized solutions to life that will eventually deal with some of Earth’s most imminent problems, like pandemics, global warming, and plastics contamination. Particularly concerned about the future of sustainable education, three Arizona State University (ASU) students won $6,000 in startup funds for their new circular economy project through the Microsoft Community Impact Pitch-Off in late November. Hoping to meet the needs of underserved high school students in the Phoenix metro area, Brian Boyle, Matthew Burmeister and Andrew John De Los Santos (three master’s students from the School of Sustainability) created The Circular Classroom. It is an embodiment of their belief that technology could help transform hard-to-recycle plastic waste into low-cost 3D printed educational materials. Additionally, the project truly touches on all three pillars of sustainability: environmental, economic and social.

Graphic by The Circular Classroom team

According to the trio, the Circular Classroom aims to address a myriad of community needs in the Phoenix area, where many local high schools suffer from a lack of funding, which creates barriers to technology and learning opportunities. Meanwhile, schools and society at large are creating plastic waste streams that are not easily recyclable. For example, they were concerned with plastic bottle caps made out of polypropylene which does not biodegrade, meaning it would take hundreds of years for them to decompose in a landfill, and if not recycled, these caps can turn up in the water and pose a danger to marine life because of their small size. In the United States, 2.5 million plastic bottles are thrown away every hour, and each one of them has a cap on, which is another reason why this project is so important.

The winners of the challenge claim that now students will have the opportunity to be introduced to a circular economy model where they can produce 3D printing educational materials from what would otherwise be a plastic waste. In doing so, it generates an opportunity to increase high school graduation rates by keeping students engaged in classrooms, reduce the school budget on 3D printing filament by providing them with the technology to generate their own filament from plastic waste, and build capacity which can create pathways to employment or higher education by training students on Computer-Aided Design (CAD).

“Our excitement and motivation for The Circular Classroom stems from the opportunity to introduce a circular economy education model into local high schools,” said Boyle, who is pursuing a Masters degree on Sustainability Solutions at ASU. “We are unaware of schools currently providing this learning opportunity to students, yet feel that it is imperative to give exposure to the next generation and empower students by building capacity to address contemporary challenges surrounding waste. Furthermore, by prioritizing underserved high schools, we aim to provide technological aptitude and learning opportunities for students to persist in high school graduation and beyond.”

They have come up with a process that is fun and simple. First off, they need to collect bottle caps at schools, so they plan to begin by identifying a local high school to establish a partnership, select interested teachers, engage students, and then set up collection sites in the classrooms. Then the plastic waste is transformed into 3D printing filament, and finally, they can 3D print new designs for educational supplies using the new 3D printers that some local high schools have received through a grant.

Boyle, Burmeister and De Los Santos took home $1,000 in prize money and $5,000 in implementation funds to start putting their plan into action. They will use the funds to purchase technology that local high schools can use to shred plastic into plastic flakes and then extrude them into spools for their 3D printers (they are currently considering buying ReDeTec’s Protocycler+). Boyle estimates that with the funding and right high school partnership opportunities, they could implement and pilot for The Circular Classroom in up to two local schools. In addition to Microsoft, the team is partnering with GreenLight Solutions, an organization that will provide ASU student support for training teachers on how to use the shredder/grinder and 3D printer.

Two of the three team members receive the $6,000 check

The idea originally came from a video of a volunteer-based 3D printing operation using plastic bottle caps in Bali, Indonesia, and from one of the team member’s experiences attending public schools in the Phoenix metro area. Now it has led the three bright minds to become winners of the Microsoft Community Pitch-Off, an event co-sponsored by Microsoft and Net Impact (a nonprofit organization for students and professionals interested in using business skills in support of various social and environmental causes) that gives students the opportunity to propose a solution that addresses a problem in their local community. Both judges from Microsoft and the local community were in charge of evaluating the proposals.

Microsoft is on point with its environmental sustainability efforts and is committed to addressing important challenges for communities where their data centers operate, so through community partnerships, the multinational company creates shared value while also advancing social opportunity, enhancing economic growth, and supporting environmental sustainability. To enter the program, the students had to present their idea for how to best leverage Microsoft’s initiatives and local community priorities to address an important issue in their area.

The platform for this particular education model is based around 3D printing and resource recovery, giving a chance to Microsoft volunteers to provide their technical expertise to students. These volunteers could help mentor students on how to use the 3D CAD software necessary to 3D print. They can also take any collected bottle caps to donate as 3D printing feedstock at the schools. While non-profit Green Light Solutions has undergraduate and graduate consultants that could guide teachers on the operations of the shredder/grinder and 3D printer.

Students don’t only get the chance to explore their local area to assess local challenges or create strategies to address them, this opportunity also gives them a greater understanding of collaborations and local resources, as well as demonstrable experience in taking an idea and turning it into a fully developed project. How would you use 3D printing to help your local community?

[Image credit: ASU, Net Impact and Microsoft]

The post Microsoft Community Pitch-Off: Turning Plastic Waste Into Educational Supplies with 3D Printing appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

Dezeen Day Recap

Dezeen Day

The first annual Dezeen Day conference, was definitely a sight to see and I will do my best to share my opinions on the day as a whole. I did not know what to expect going into the conference, but it seemed like it would be a fun time so I decided to go. It turned out to be an eye-opening and interesting experience.

Firstly I want it to be known that architects and designers think in such an interesting manner. I say this because you can see and hear the fascination they all have with life and building. They try to answer seemingly impossible questions. They design things through such innovative means. My brain was in pain throughout the day. It was not bad pain. It was the pain you get when learning something that is out of your comfort zone; it hurts now but you will feel amazing later. The way designers think allows them to have no fear of tackling large issues. The focus of this particular conference was on the Circular Economy and sustainability practices within design. In the design community, there is no one way to solve a problem. There are various ways to tackle an issue. Through the panel discussions and keynote speakers, we got a sense of how there are so many people working in different sectors of design to make this happen. I will reflect on a couple of major talks and discussion points from some of the panel conversations.

The first talk of the day was my favorite, and it had a lot of information packed within it. Paola Antonelli, the Senior Curator of the Department of Architecture & Design and the Director of R&D at MOMA, gave an interesting perspective to the audience. Her belief is that the understanding of humans and their likely extinction can lead to better resulting futures. What I deduced from this was that being aware of extinction leads us to be aware of the future generations and people we may be affecting. It is important for us to focus on future scenarios and think about how our actions can hurt others. This begs the question, “What can people do?”. The rest of the conference was aligned toward answering the question of what can people do to make effective change for the future within design. Paola also stated, “We want people to understand the complexity of the systems but not to be scared of them.” Designers are able to readily grasp design thinking and problem solving, but a variety of people outside the field may not be able to implore the same skills. This makes it important for design to help others outside of its community, and Dezeen Day also had a discussion on education reform. The conference was interwoven and facilitated elegantly. Each panel there was able to feed into one another.

Paola Antonelli at Dezeen Day

There was a lot of information packed within this talk so I did my best to summarize a lot of her ideologies and main points of discussion. The talk had a focus on waiting for making things. Within the design community, ideas are a dime a dozen, but which ones are effective? Typically the ones that well mapped out and executed over time. This ties into her discussion about extinction. We are planning towards building better infrastructures to help humanity over time, and this takes a lot of diligence. This reflected the rest of the day in terms of discussions and panel conversations.

Throughout the discussion, Paola was highlighting the various art she curated for her Broken Nature Exhibition and the significance of each piece. Something of interest to me was the scientific lens that most of the pieces were taking. It lead to other discussion panels throughout the day focused on science, design, and architecture.

A final large takeaway of the talk was that anger could be a source of change.

The only way to live well is to be for others or amongst others. Anger could be a better engine to try and improve things in the future.

This mindset is interesting as it shows the raw emotion needed to drive change. Anger is a great motivator for change because when we are lukewarm, complacent and not very engaged with our surroundings, we have no reason to improve.

The rest of the conference was conducted through the lens of the initial talk. The discussion panels held were the following:

Panel discussion: post-plastic materials
Panel discussion: future cities
Keynote: Liam Young
Conversation: Designing for the circular economy
Panel discussion: entrepreneurs
Panel discussion: fixing education
Keynote: Dr. Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg

Work by Arthur Mamou-Mani

The ideals and conversations at the conference were outlined thoroughly with this introductory talk with Paola. I personally resonated well with the Panel Discussion for Post-Plastic Materials. The conversation was oriented towards the various ways we as humans can be innovative in the materials we are using. I was able to talk to some people from the discussion panel after their talk such as Natsai Audrey Chieza. She is a designer and founder of Faber Futures, and they create biologically inspired materials. After hearing the talk and seeing the work that these individuals are doing it opened me up to a critical lens of understanding with societal material usage. It also inspired me to think big in ways that seemed unfathomable. This was the result of listening to Arthur Mamou-Mani. Arthur is an architect and director of Mamou-Mani Architects. He also specializes in digital fabrication and advanced bioplastics. I was in awe by the extremely large structures he creates with 3D printing and the use of wood. I will be following up on his work later as well.

I also met some other people who helped with the conference. This included Stacie Woolsey who is a design graduate who created her own master’s course. We were able to have a fun chat before her actual panel discussion. She definitely is a great inspiration for young people who want to rid of the typical educational model. I will be discussing this thought process a bit more later.

There were a couple of conversations had about 3D printing and biomaterials that I will be discussing more in-depth because they require some more research. For the overall conference though, it was a good time. The staff was excellent, and the overall programming was extremely engaging. There was no moment without engagement talk wise. I am a reporter who mostly focuses on 3D printing, but after the conference, my eyes have opened up significantly to the importance of design practices. It was awesome to see people who were combining architecture, bioengineering, and design to build interesting things.

The post Dezeen Day Recap appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

BigRep live 3D prints 4m x 4m recycled plastic wall

Large format 3D printer manufacturer BigRep has started 3D printing an urban green habitat installation named GENESIS Eco Screen. Using only recycled plastic, the work showcases the potential of additive manufacturing as a sustainable means of architecture. It’s build is currently ongoing on public view at Humboldt University in Berlin. GENESIS is set to premiere […]

3D Printing and the Circular Economy Part 7: the Viability of 3D Printing

Circular Economy Cycle

It is important to address that waste is less of an issue when a mindset is adopted towards solving it. I make this disclaimer because as we have been looking into this series on the circular economy, we have initially outlined various ideals and thought processes opposed to focusing solely on 3D printing. Any mindset shift towards a more circular economy is necessary before we can utilize a technology to build towards this ideal.

3D printing is a great technology due to its ability to be an additive process versus a typical subtractive process that is found in most manufacturing environments. In this article, we will discuss a bit more on the implications of additive technology and other initiatives associated with it. This will help us to have a larger view of the circular economy as well in relation to additive manufacturing.

Additive technology is amazing in terms of waste reduction overall. When a technical system is built to create product based on building up, there is a larger ability for sustainable development as people print items as they need them. With a subtractive manufacturing process, products are created by taking away from larger materials. This can leave many pieces unusable after the initial product creation. This then leaves a product residue to either be thrown away or in need of further recycling. This then takes a lot of time to conduct, and it becomes an issue of efficiency within the circular economy framework. Not only does this process waste time, but one must now calculate other factors such as transporting residual waste and how much energy that consumes. There are a lot of factors that do not have deeper analysis in terms of the classical manufacturing process.

Image result for 3d printing waste management

3D Printing Waste

The additive manufacturing field is ripe for experimentation as it is a naturally disruptive concept and methodology. A very important thought process within the field currently is a focus on material development. Material development is essential when it comes to sustainability. Depending on polymer structures, we can build various materials that have specific properties that are of our liking. This can lead to materials that are also easier to recycle, as well as they have natural biodegradable properties. It is still important to build out a larger infrastructure of life that would lead to people actually being knowledgeable of their choices and how they affect the greater world. Although 3D printing inherently helps to prevent excess production, it is still a problem of lack of awareness for people in terms of their production and consumption rates. There are a large number of people making prototypes that fail in terms of print standards. This then leads to larger amounts of waste as well.

Image result for material development and additive manufacturing

Material Development

In terms of sustainability, additive manufacturing is better than traditional methods. It is still imperative to realize that we are at a loss in terms of sustainability if we are not working on infrastructures. This includes infrastructures of thinking as well as infrastructures of methodology. We must utilize technology such as 3D printing to benefit the world. We should not abuse the benefits that this technology can provide to the larger scale of humanity.

The post 3D Printing and the Circular Economy Part 7: the Viability of 3D Printing appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

3D Printing and the Circular Economy Part 6: CNC Machining

Desktop Metal CNC

CNC machining is a manufacturing process in which pre-programmed computer software dictates the movement of factory tools and machinery. The process can be used to control a range of complex machinery, from grinders and lathes to mills and routers. With CNC machining, three-dimensional cutting tasks can be accomplished in a single set of prompts. CNC refers to computer numerical control. Today we will be comparing CNC methods to 3D Printing and additive manufacturing in terms of their places within a circular economy.

Transportation waste is not as large of a concern when it comes to CNC machining. It is important to have one’s material ready before they are to place the material within a CNC center. The layout of one’s factory or fabrication environment is more critical towards this type of waste. Similar thoughts can be arrived at in terms of additive manufacturing. Based on the types of material used for a CNC machine, it is slightly difficult to transport larger amounts of the metals used for these machines.

Inventory waste is mostly oriented towards what material you are using for the CNC process. Typically we are using metal materials. The type of materials typically used consist of brass, copper alloys, aluminum, steel, stainless steel, titanium, and plastics. The type of material is very important because of production needs. CNC machining is a subtractive process. Hence, the various materials will cause different shearings as well as carving residue and debris that will be produced during a cutting out of a piece.

Image result for cnc machine debris

CNC Waste

Waiting time in terms of CNC machining depends on the feed rate. Feeds specifically refers to the feed rate the tool advances through the material while speed refers to the surface speed that the cutting edge of the tool is moving and is needed to calculate the spindle RPM. Feed is generally measured in Inches Per Minute (IPM) in the US and speed is measured in Surface Feet per Minute. Feed speed as well as material density causes the amount of wait time to differ per manufactured part. Part geometry also has a role to play here as well as hardness. A CNC typically is faster than a 3D printer device, but this is again dependent on material and geometry.

Over-processing is not as much of a concern for both of these methods of manufacturing. CNC machining and 3D printing are both great at building quick prototypes of designs. Over-processing can become problematic in CNC when one wants to make very polished cuts of a material to have sharper edges and rounded surfaces. There may be an element of over-processing there that leads to time wasted.

Post processing is a big issue when it comes to 3D printers. Post processing issues are not as apparent with CNC parts. They typically are ready for deployment after they have been produced with excellent surface finishes.

Image result for cnc waste

CNC Carvings

Recyclability is apparent with various CNC waste materials post production. It is important to be constantly aware of the different products used. In order to recycle, it necessitates the separation of materials. This requires bins oriented towards specific materials labelled clearly near a CNC machine. Without this, most of the scrap will be left unattended and mix together to a point of difficult separation.

Overall the differences between CNC machines and 3D print are considerable. The sheer amount of waste material produced by a typical CNC is way more than a 3D printer. There are efficiency trade offs that are associated with 3D printers in terms of speed and material transportation. In the future advances to additive manufacturing will shrink the gap in terms of creating products in a more sustainable and additive manner versus a subtractive fashion.

The post 3D Printing and the Circular Economy Part 6: CNC Machining appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

3D Printing & the Circular Economy Part 4: Anthroposphere

Technosphere

Today we will be discussing the anthroposphere in relation to a circular economy. The anthroposphere can be defined as the part of the environment that is made or modified by humans for use in human activities and human habitats. People also refer to the anthroposphere as the technosphere. Humans have evolved over time to build more tools to navigate their environment. Technology is the crux of this. In order to navigate one’s environment, there is an implied and necessary usage of resources within an environment. To thrive, one must efficiently use their resources, but the question is whether or not humans are doing so. The circular economy is trying to establish a thought process and system of humans having a connection to their habits that cause deterioration of the world. We shall look into how the current state of humanity and the anthroposphere point towards how close we are to moving towards a circular economy.

The history of human development and advancement is imbued in creation. We are a species that continuously builds. This is a testament to the human society’s sense of exploration and experimentation. We are consistently challenging the status quo and trying to make our lives better. With humans inherently trying to make the world precise or technology driven, we are applying a mindset that is narrow minded at times. The technology and innovations we create are susceptible to unsustainable production methods. An example can be taken from overproduction with the use of injection molding systems at different companies. The technology itself is great as it produces such a large quantity of items for us in a short time, but that is a downfall of the technology as well. It is super efficient, and it causes us over produce. Building a machine such as an injection molder also leads to the utilization of resources inherently. Now it is important to denote that the technology is not bad; it just leads to unintended problems in terms of sustainability, the anthroposphere, and the circular economy. This is the internal debate of innovation and technology. We are trying to advance society, but we may be digressing it if we use all our resources. There is only a finite supply it seems.

How does Human Development relate to the Circular Economy

In terms of humans, I think a good amount of people in the developing world are okay in terms of life standards. This is granted a generalization, but there is validity to this. There is another opposing statement that occurs from this frame of reference: Life in underdeveloped nations is affected by developed nations having better standards of life. This does not necessarily bode well for the whole anthroposphere and the circular economy. It also seems unlikely that everywhere on Earth will have an equal distribution of resources and technology development. So how do we still work on this ideal of a circular economy when things seem unlikely? If we want to live the ideals of a circular economy to better the anthroposphere, various nations should be more focused on producing what they can based on their environment. Would this be good or bad though?

Waste and Manufacturing Cycle

Based on the issues brought up today, I will be doing more research. I believe the importance of localization in production is a major key within our anthroposphere. These are some basic questions and assumptions I have. I will be researching and providing statistics on various items within industrial waste as well as nations that are focused on localization of their production and how this contributes to the overall anthroposphere.

3D Printing Interview with Buzz Baldwin of 3D Printlife

Buzz Baldwin

Buzz Baldwin is the founder of 3D Printlife. The company is committed to reducing the environmental impact of 3D Printing. From their Enviro ABS, to their Eco-Friendly spooling and environmental contributions, they strive to deliver customers filaments, while protecting the world. 3D Printlife filaments are all made in the USA.

Give us a summary on your background and how you’ve reached this point in your life and career.

I grew up in New Hampshire. I have always had a love of nature. I went to Berkeley college of music and played in a band for a while. I loved it but I needed to pay the bills. Then I started working for Warner Brothers and worked for their animation scene. I then was looking to be a bit more entrepreneurial. I was sent an article in the Economist, and it was all about the revolution of 3D Printing. It was when all the patents were expiring. I then decided to try and get into the space. I was thinking that it would be a tech that almost everyone would have in their homes. We started looking for manufacturers. I had an imaging background so I was looking into a way to bring in non OEM branded filaments to the scene. Through luck I met a dental hygienist who had a friend who was a biochemist and we connected. This allowed for us to be able to start and make a filament that was our Enviro ABS line. It was eco friendly and compared well property wise to typical ABS filament. That did okay and gave us a great amount of brand recognition. We have been really trying to build a product line that is.

How has your early musical studies background been applicable to your entrepreneurial career?

I have met others in this space with a music background. I think there is a weird super power of looking at a complex scenario and being able to look at areas of improvement. We are able to look at a complex system and the ability to know the problem quickly. A lot of music is very geometrical. This is a simplistic way to look at it and it allows people to see things. Composition and lyric writing was essential for my studies. There are no rules but there are tools. With songwriting you have to create something that is interesting but not too repetitive. It is important to apply this thought process to entrepreneurship. When applied to my company there needs to be quality and differentiation. Anyone can write a song, but how is it memorable or good? It is difficult to make something that innately is boring when it has no real meaning until someone creates the story.

3D Print Life Enviro ABS

What got you interested in 3D Printing?

My friend sent me an article about 3D Printing and I thought that was really fascinating. The article did not really give a vision or understanding of what is the process. As a songwriter, you are creating something from nothing. With 3D printing you are able to create something from nothing. I think that is extremely empowering. It opens up a lot of possibilities. It opens up functional creativity. The ability to have decentralized manufacturing is amazing. An inventor in their garage can create a sustainable living for themselves. A remote makerspace in Africa has the possibility to create their own tools and develop. Makerspaces and fab labs around the world can benefit large organizations and people.

How is the field of additive manufacturing critical for the ideals of a circular economy?

It is tough. We have had a lot of people ask about this. Overall the idea is great. On the material side, the degradation of a polymer occurs always once it is used for 3D Printing so it is difficult. There are needs for engineering PEEK, and being able to make materials that are eco friendly. It is still difficult though.

3D Printed Pokemon from 3D Print Clean

What are the biggest concerns of additive manufacturing in terms of sustainability?

It is a tough question to answer. There are so many factors. Additive is a niche space. The great part about it is mostly prototyping and education. There is not a mass production level yet. We all want to change the world. There still needs to be a focus on making sure thermoplastics are placed in the right environment. Biodegradability is only applicable in certain locations. End users should be focused on how this actually important. I would hope additive will create a way for us to reduce mass produced and injection molded parts. It is a larger scale problem that people are somewhat ignorant to this.

3D Print Life EnviroABS

What has been the biggest surprise in terms of the work you have done in this industry?

I am surprised by all the creativity out there. There is so much. The space lends itself well to this mindset. One is only limited by their imagination and it is great. There are endless possibilities. One of the biggest surprises is that I as someone who went to school for music can even have an impact on the space. It opens up invention and manufacturing to anyone. A bit of investment can lead a large way for anyone to be able to create something. The level of advancement for using technology to benefit humanity has been tremendous. The ability to think and then conceptualize allows people to build.

3D Printing & the Circular Economy Part 3: Injection Molding

Injection Molding Diagram

As referred to in our previous article, injection molding refers to when plastic pellets are pressed into a mold cavity and under pressure and heat become a certain shape. Injection molding produces low scrap rates relative to other traditional manufacturing processes like CNC machining which cut away substantial percentages of an original plastic block or sheet. This however can be a negative relative to additive manufacturing processes like 3D printing that have even lower scrap rates. Overall this is a method that does not produce a lot of scrap through initial production. The downsides that are associated with injection molding include high costs in terms of startup, molding, and tooling. We will compare this manufacturing technique in terms of sustainability vs additive manufacturing.

Transportation waste is not as large of a concern when it comes to injection molding. It is important to have one’s material ready before they are to place it into an injection molding apparatus. The layout of one’s factory or fabrication environment is more critical towards this type of waste. Similar thoughts can be arrived at in terms of additive manufacturing. One typically must feed an additive manufacturing device with material, and transportation of materials is reliant upon the layout of one’s factory or fabrication environment.

Mold Cavitation

Inventory waste is something to keep in mind for this type of manufacturing. There is a high production rate that occurs with an injection molding system. This rate is reliant on two factors:

Cycle time
Mold Cavitation

Cycle time refers to how long it takes to complete a function, job, or task from start to finish. Cycle time is used in differentiating total duration of a process from its run time. Mold cavitation refers to the creation of an empty space that forms the basis of our molding process. So depending on the size of a mold, the cycle time shall vary. One can create a large amount of product fairly quickly with an injection mold system. This can lead to extra inventory than needed if organizations are freely creating objects for a 3rd party. This could be a case where a supplier is just making bulk production for when a 3rd party company needs more product at a later date. Additive manufacturing production rate is based on cycle time and the size of the object to be printed. This causes less inventory waste as there is a lot of time associated with printing a lot of materials at the moment.

Cycle Time

Waiting is a large differentiator in terms of injection molding vs additive manufacturing. 3D Printing technology has vastly increased over the years in terms of efficiency and speed. However, processes such as injection molding, have well established production rates that have been sharpened through decades of use.

Over-processing is not as much of a concern for both of these methods of manufacturing. Injection molding and 3D printing are both great at building quick prototypes of designs. I would argue that the biggest pain point is under processing. Post processing is a big issue when it comes to 3D printers. An injection molded part does have issues in terms of post processing, but not as glaring as most 3D Printing systems at the moment. This then leads to more time and energy spent on production.

Plastic and the Circular Economy

Finally, we will discuss the ability to recycle and reuse products that have been created through injection molding. Re-melting & melt filtration are required for the recycling of injection molded parts. Proper re-melting of the recycled material occurs under very low shear rates in the extruder and at the lower end of the melting temperature. Shear rate refers to the rate at which a progressive shearing deformation is applied to some material. The shearing deformation refers to when there is a deformation of a material substance in which parallel internal surfaces slide past one another. The objective is to gently re-melt the original material, which ensures maintenance of the material properties. A proper melt filtration process will remove any contaminants in the melt like cellulose, metal or wood pieces. Filtration refers to any of various mechanical, physical or biological operations that separates solids from fluids (liquids or gases) by adding a medium through which only the fluid can pass. State of the art melt filtration is fully automated and does not require manual operation steps. The melt is filtered continuously at low pressure and can remove particles as small as 70 microns in diameter. Similar processes can be applied to 3D printing materials as well.

Overproduction is a key point in terms of sustainability within both of these processes. It is important to consider the high startup costs associated with injection molding. It typically requires a lot of money to build objects through injection molding because it is a process that creates objects in large quantities. This can lead to having to hold various products within an inventory for an extended period of time. This is waste as these products may have been created without a definite need for them in the present. 3D Printing takes more time to create products, but they can be done with an intent to make a specific amount for an order instead of printing extra for use later.

Throughout this series, it is important to recognize that 3D Printing is a great solution. We still have to be critical of it as a viable option in traditional manufacturing settings. We must have a critical eye in terms of waste reduction. This also must include waste reduction in terms of faulty processes. This will allow us to have an interesting examination of the circular economy.