• Treffer 7 von 139
Zurück zur Trefferliste

Minimizing the FFF-3D printer hardware bias on particle emission by adjustment of the set extruder temperature

  • Fused filament fabrication (FFF) on desktop 3D printers is a material extrusion-based technique often used by educational institutions, small enterprises and private households. Polymeric filaments are melted and extruded through a heated nozzle to form a 3D object in layers. The extrusion temperature is therefore a key parameter for a successful print job, but also one of the main driving factors for the emission of harmful air pollutants, namely ultrafine particles and volatile organic gases, which are formed by thermal stress on the polymeric feedstock. The awareness of potential health risks has increased the number of emission studies in the past years. However, the multiplicity of study designs makes an objective comparison of emission data challenging because printer hardware factors such as the actual extruder temperature (TE) and also feedstockspecific emissions are not considered. We assume that across the market of commercial low- and mid-price FFF printers substantialFused filament fabrication (FFF) on desktop 3D printers is a material extrusion-based technique often used by educational institutions, small enterprises and private households. Polymeric filaments are melted and extruded through a heated nozzle to form a 3D object in layers. The extrusion temperature is therefore a key parameter for a successful print job, but also one of the main driving factors for the emission of harmful air pollutants, namely ultrafine particles and volatile organic gases, which are formed by thermal stress on the polymeric feedstock. The awareness of potential health risks has increased the number of emission studies in the past years. However, the multiplicity of study designs makes an objective comparison of emission data challenging because printer hardware factors such as the actual extruder temperature (TE) and also feedstockspecific emissions are not considered. We assume that across the market of commercial low- and mid-price FFF printers substantial deviations between actual and set extruder temperatures exist, which have a strong effect on the emissions and hence may bias the findings of exposure studies. In our last publication, we presented a standardized feedstock-specific emission test method and showed that for each investigated feedstock an increase in actual extruder temperature was accompanied by an increase in particle emissions (Tang and Seeger, 2022). Therefore, any systematic discrepancy between set and actual extruder temperature matters. In this study, we used a thermocouple and an infrared camera to measure the actual extruder temperatures at different heights. We found significant under- and overestimation of the actual extruder temperatures by the respective set temperatures in three commercial printers. This caused a broad variation of the measured total numbers of emitted particles (TP), even when the same feedstock was operated. For the determination of TP, we followed the DE-UZ 219 test guideline. In a second round we repeated the tests with all printers adjusted to exactly the same extruder temperatures, i.e., to TE=230°C for ABS and TE=210°C for PLA. All measurements were conducted in a 1 m³ emission test chamber. Particle emissions in the size range between 4 nm and 20 μm were detected. Printing on three different printer models without temperature adjustment resulted for each of the investigated feedstocks in a variation in TP of around two orders of magnitude. After temperature adjustment, this was substantially reduced to approx. one order of magnitude and hence minimizes the bias of printer hardware on the emissions. Our findings suggest that adjustment of the extruder temperature should be mandatory in emission testing standards. It also poses a more accurate benchmark and provides more reliable emission data for evaluation of indoor air quality or for health risk assessments. In addition, a proper temperature setting is in the interest of the user. Some commercial FFF printers may have a higher actual extruder temperature than displayed and unintended overheating may not only impair the print quality but may cause unnecessarily increased exposure to particle emissions.zeige mehrzeige weniger

Volltext Dateien herunterladen

  • EAC 2023 Abstract Tang.pdf
    eng
  • EAC 2023 Tang_final.pdf
    eng

Metadaten exportieren

Weitere Dienste

Teilen auf Twitter Suche bei Google Scholar Anzahl der Zugriffe auf dieses Dokument
Metadaten
Autor*innen:Chi-Long TangORCiD
Koautor*innen:Stefan Seeger, Mathias Röllig
Dokumenttyp:Vortrag
Veröffentlichungsform:Präsentation
Sprache:Englisch
Jahr der Erstveröffentlichung:2023
Organisationseinheit der BAM:1 Analytische Chemie; Referenzmaterialien
1 Analytische Chemie; Referenzmaterialien / 1.4 Prozessanalytik
4 Material und Umwelt
4 Material und Umwelt / 4.5 Kunst- und Kulturgutanalyse
8 Zerstörungsfreie Prüfung
8 Zerstörungsfreie Prüfung / 8.0 Abteilungsleitung und andere
DDC-Klassifikation:Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / Ingenieurwissenschaften / Ingenieurwissenschaften und zugeordnete Tätigkeiten
Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / Ingenieurwissenschaften / Sanitär- und Kommunaltechnik; Umwelttechnik
Freie Schlagwörter:3D printing; Emission testing; Indoor air quality; Thermal imaging; Ultrafine particles
Themenfelder/Aktivitätsfelder der BAM:Material
Material / Additive Fertigung
Umwelt
Veranstaltung:European Aerosol Conference 2023
Veranstaltungsort:Málaga, Spain
Beginndatum der Veranstaltung:03.09.2023
Enddatum der Veranstaltung:08.09.2023
Verfügbarkeit des Dokuments:Datei im Netzwerk der BAM verfügbar ("Closed Access")
Datum der Freischaltung:14.09.2023
Referierte Publikation:Nein
Eingeladener Vortrag:Nein
Einverstanden
Diese Webseite verwendet technisch erforderliche Session-Cookies. Durch die weitere Nutzung der Webseite stimmen Sie diesem zu. Unsere Datenschutzerklärung finden Sie hier.