ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of SLS and mFFF Additive Manufacturing Techniques for the Production of a Metal Specimen.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enabling Sensor-Integrated and Sustainable Aerospace Structures Through Additively Manufactured Aluminium Mechanisms for CubeSats.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Predicting Design Solutions with Scenarios Considering the Quality of Materials and Products Based on a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA).Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This work is part of a research project aimed at developing a bio-based binder, composed mainly of polylactic acid (PLA), to produce Ti6Al4V feedstock suitable for use in MAM (Metal Additive Manufacturing) via mFFF (metal Fused Filament Fabrication), in order to manufacture a titanium alloy specimen. While in Bragaglia et al. the mechanical characteristics of this sample were analyzed, the aim used of this study is to compare the mentioned mFFF process with one of the most used MAM processes in aerospace applications, known as Selective Laser Sintering (SLS), based on the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) method. Despite the excellent properties of the products manufactured via SLS, this 3D printing technology involves high upfront capital costs while mFFF is a cheaper process. Moreover, the mFFF process has the advantage of potentially being exported for production in microgravity or weightless environments for in-space use. Nevertheless, most scientific literature shows comparisons of the Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF) printing stage with other AM technologies, and there are no comparative LCA "Candle to Gate" studies with mFFF processes to manufacture the same metal sample. Therefore, both MAM processes are analyzed with the LCA "Candle to Gate" method, from the extraction of raw materials to the production of the finished titanium alloy sample. The main results demonstrate a higher impact (+50%) process for mFFF and higher electrical energy consumption (7.31 kWh) compared to SLS (0.32 kWh). After power consumption, the use of titanium becomes the main contributor of Global Warming Potential (GWP) and Abiotic Depletion Potential (ADP) for both processes. Finally, an alternative scenario is evaluated in which the electrical energy is exclusively generated through photovoltaics. In this case, the results show how the mFFF process develops a more sustainable outcome than SLS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.