This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
Metal additive manufacturing (AM) is revered for the design freedom it brings, but is it environmentally better or worse than conventional manufacturing? Since few direct comparisons are published, this study compared AM data from life-cycle assessment literature to conventional manufacturing data from the Granta EduPack database. The comparison included multiple printing technologies for steel, aluminum, and titanium. Results showed that metal AM had far higher CO2 footprints per kg of material processed than casting, extrusion, rolling, forging, and wire drawing, so it is usually a less sustainable choice than these. However, there were circumstances where it was a more sustainable choice, and there was significant overlap between these circumstances and aerospace industry use of metal AM. Notably, lightweight parts reducing embodied material impacts, and reducing use-phase impacts through fuel efficiency. Finally, one key finding was the irrelevance of comparing machining to AM per kg of material processed, since one is subtractive and the other is additive. Recommendations are given for future studies to use more relevant functional units to provide better comparisons.
Corrie Van Sice; Jeremy Faludi. COMPARING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF METAL ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING TO CONVENTIONAL MANUFACTURING. Proceedings of the Design Society 2021, 1, 671 -680.
AMA StyleCorrie Van Sice, Jeremy Faludi. COMPARING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF METAL ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING TO CONVENTIONAL MANUFACTURING. Proceedings of the Design Society. 2021; 1 ():671-680.
Chicago/Turabian StyleCorrie Van Sice; Jeremy Faludi. 2021. "COMPARING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF METAL ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING TO CONVENTIONAL MANUFACTURING." Proceedings of the Design Society 1, no. : 671-680.
Sustainable design methods and tools abound, but their implementation in practice remains marginal. This article brings together results from previous literature reviews and analyses of sustainable design methods and tools, as well as input from design researchers and professional practitioners to identify the needs and gaps in the area. It results in a shared vision of how sustainable design methods and tools can be more tightly integrated into mainstream product design and development, as well as the current state of practice and research in relation to four central questions: What are the needs and values of industry regarding sustainable design? What improvements in sustainable design methods and tools would most drive industry forward? How should researchers move forward with developing more useful sustainable design methods and tools? How can sustainable design be more effectively integrated into industry? A roadmap for the international sustainable design research community is proposed with descriptions of short-, medium-, and long-term tasks for addressing each question. The purpose is to support collective progress and discussions on method and tool development and adoption, and to enable more tangible success in mainstreaming sustainable design practices in industry.
Jeremy Faludi; Steven Hoffenson; Sze Yin Kwok; Michael Saidani; Sophie I. Hallstedt; Cassandra Telenko; Victor Martinez. A Research Roadmap for Sustainable Design Methods and Tools. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8174 .
AMA StyleJeremy Faludi, Steven Hoffenson, Sze Yin Kwok, Michael Saidani, Sophie I. Hallstedt, Cassandra Telenko, Victor Martinez. A Research Roadmap for Sustainable Design Methods and Tools. Sustainability. 2020; 12 (19):8174.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJeremy Faludi; Steven Hoffenson; Sze Yin Kwok; Michael Saidani; Sophie I. Hallstedt; Cassandra Telenko; Victor Martinez. 2020. "A Research Roadmap for Sustainable Design Methods and Tools." Sustainability 12, no. 19: 8174.
Recommendations of sustainable design methods are usually based on theory, not empirical industry tests. Furthermore, since professionals often mix components of different design methods, recommending whole methods may not be relevant. It may be better to recommend component activities or mindsets. To provide empirical grounding for recommendations, this study performed 23 workshops on three sustainable design methods involving over 172 professionals from 27 companies, including consultancies and manufacturers in three industries (consumer electronics, furniture and clothing). The design methods tested were The Natural Step, Whole System Mapping and Biomimicry. Participants were surveyed about what components in each design method drove perceived innovation, sustainability or other value, and why. The most valued components only partially supported theoretical predictions. Thus, recommendations should be more empirically based. Results also found unique and complementary value in components of each method, which suggests recommending mixed methods for sustainable design. This may help design professionals find more value in green design practices, and thus integrate sustainability more into their practice.
Jeremy Faludi; Felix Yiu; Alice Agogino. Where do professionals find sustainability and innovation value? Empirical tests of three sustainable design methods. Design Science 2020, 6, 1 .
AMA StyleJeremy Faludi, Felix Yiu, Alice Agogino. Where do professionals find sustainability and innovation value? Empirical tests of three sustainable design methods. Design Science. 2020; 6 ():1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJeremy Faludi; Felix Yiu; Alice Agogino. 2020. "Where do professionals find sustainability and innovation value? Empirical tests of three sustainable design methods." Design Science 6, no. : 1.
Previous studies on the environmental impacts of polymeric additive manufacturing (AM) have shown that higher printer utilization dramatically improves impacts per part—so much so that it might dominate all other interventions if taken to an extreme. High utilization can be both temporal (printing constantly) and spatial (printing many parts at once). In this study, life cycle assessments (LCAs) were performed for an inkjet fusion printer with exceptionally high spatial utilization capacity and were compared to previous LCAs of nine printers printing with eight materials. Comparisons were performed in different utilizations, both temporal and spatial, to determine if high utilization reduces the environmental impact of AM more than other interventions, such as using sustainable print materials. For the inkjet fusion printer, maximum utilization dramatically reduced the environmental impact per part to less than 1% of its impact in lowest utilization; this was below the impacts of other printers in low utilizations. However, when compared in the same utilization scenarios, the inkjet fusion printer still caused a higher environmental impact per part than almost all printers, primarily due to high energy use. The lowest-impact printer used both high spatial utilization and low-impact materials that also enabled a low-energy printing process. Therefore, printer utilization is not the overriding factor and must be combined with energy efficiency and material choice.
Yuan Shi; Jeremy Faludi. Using life cycle assessment to determine if high utilization is the dominant force for sustainable polymer additive manufacturing. Additive Manufacturing 2020, 35, 101307 .
AMA StyleYuan Shi, Jeremy Faludi. Using life cycle assessment to determine if high utilization is the dominant force for sustainable polymer additive manufacturing. Additive Manufacturing. 2020; 35 ():101307.
Chicago/Turabian StyleYuan Shi; Jeremy Faludi. 2020. "Using life cycle assessment to determine if high utilization is the dominant force for sustainable polymer additive manufacturing." Additive Manufacturing 35, no. : 101307.
Many different product development approaches are taught and used in engineering and management disciplines. These formalized design methods, processes, and environments differ in the types of projects for which they are relevant, the project components they include, and the support they provide users. This paper details a review of sixteen well-established product development approaches, the development of a decision support system to help designers and managers navigate these approaches, and the administration of a survey to gather subjective assessments and feedback from design experts. The included approaches—design thinking, systems thinking, total quality management, agile development, waterfall process, engineering design, spiral model, vee model, axiomatic design, value-driven design, decision-based design, lean manufacturing, six sigma, theory of constraints, scrum, and extreme programming—are categorized based on six criteria: complexity, guidance, phase, hardware or software applicability, values, and users. A decision support system referred to as the Product Development Approach Advisor (PD Advisor) is developed to aid designers in navigating these approaches and selecting an appropriate approach based on specific project needs. Next, a survey is conducted with design experts to gather feedback on the support system and the categorization of approaches and criteria. The survey results are compared to the original classification of approaches by the authors to validate and provide feedback on the PD Advisor. The findings highlight the value and limitations of the PD Advisor for product development practice and education, as well as the opportunities for future work.
Shelby Stewart; Jack Giambalvo; Julia Vance; Jeremy Faludi; Steven Hoffenson. A Product Development Approach Advisor for Navigating Common Design Methods, Processes, and Environments. Designs 2020, 4, 4 .
AMA StyleShelby Stewart, Jack Giambalvo, Julia Vance, Jeremy Faludi, Steven Hoffenson. A Product Development Approach Advisor for Navigating Common Design Methods, Processes, and Environments. Designs. 2020; 4 (1):4.
Chicago/Turabian StyleShelby Stewart; Jack Giambalvo; Julia Vance; Jeremy Faludi; Steven Hoffenson. 2020. "A Product Development Approach Advisor for Navigating Common Design Methods, Processes, and Environments." Designs 4, no. 1: 4.
Jeremy Faludi; Corrie M. Van Sice; Yuan Shi; Justin Bower; Owen Brooks. Corrigendum to “Novel materials can radically improve whole-system environmental impacts of additive manufacturing” [J. Clean. Prod. 212 (2019) 1580–1590]. Journal of Cleaner Production 2019, 245, 118910 .
AMA StyleJeremy Faludi, Corrie M. Van Sice, Yuan Shi, Justin Bower, Owen Brooks. Corrigendum to “Novel materials can radically improve whole-system environmental impacts of additive manufacturing” [J. Clean. Prod. 212 (2019) 1580–1590]. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2019; 245 ():118910.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJeremy Faludi; Corrie M. Van Sice; Yuan Shi; Justin Bower; Owen Brooks. 2019. "Corrigendum to “Novel materials can radically improve whole-system environmental impacts of additive manufacturing” [J. Clean. Prod. 212 (2019) 1580–1590]." Journal of Cleaner Production 245, no. : 118910.
This study investigated best practices in teaching environmental responsibility to inventors and innovators. Because successful invention includes engineering, design, and business, best practices in all three disciplines were investigated, as well as connections among them. The investigation sought best practices in curriculum, delivery methods, and administrative leadership to maximize environmental responsibility in invention education. To find best practices, interviews of 25 instructors, administrators, and graduates from sustainable innovation and entrepreneurship programs were performed; a small literature review provided background and validation. Results found that for curriculum, there was no “silver bullet” but a wide spread of topics for different contexts; however, core topics included business knowledge, measurement of impacts, systems thinking, communication, and inclusion of social justice for broader sustainability. For delivery methods, project-based learning in interdisciplinary teams was a best practice, especially when partnering with industry or other external stakeholders. For leadership, faculty leading with strong administrative support was often praised, though other models were also described, and barriers were mentioned. Leadership best practices also included involvement of all aspects of institutions: faculty, administration, students, facilities, and operations.
Jeremy Faludi; Cindy Gilbert. Best practices for teaching green invention: Interviews on design, engineering, and business education. Journal of Cleaner Production 2019, 234, 1246 -1261.
AMA StyleJeremy Faludi, Cindy Gilbert. Best practices for teaching green invention: Interviews on design, engineering, and business education. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2019; 234 ():1246-1261.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJeremy Faludi; Cindy Gilbert. 2019. "Best practices for teaching green invention: Interviews on design, engineering, and business education." Journal of Cleaner Production 234, no. : 1246-1261.
When teaching sustainable design in industry or academia, we should teach design methods, activities, and mindsets that are most effective at driving real change in a industry. However, most studies of design practices are performed on students, not on professionals. How strongly do student perceptions of value predict those of industry teams designing real products? This study provided workshops on three sustainable design methods (The Natural Step, Whole System Mapping, and Biomimicry) for 172 professionals and 204 students, applying the methods to their actual products being developed. It surveyed both populations about which activities or mindsets within each design method provided sustainability value, innovation value, and overall value. Quantitatively, student results did not strongly predict professional opinions; professionals chose clearer favorites and valued more things. However, qualitatively, student results did predict the reasons why professionals would value the design activities and mindsets. Therefore, care should be taken to choose appropriate participants for the questions being asked in sustainable design research.
Jeremy Faludi; Felix Yiu; Ola Srour; Rami Kamareddine; Omar Ali; Selim Mecanna. Do Student Trials Predict What Professionals Value in Sustainable Design Practices? Journal of Mechanical Design 2019, 141, 1 -29.
AMA StyleJeremy Faludi, Felix Yiu, Ola Srour, Rami Kamareddine, Omar Ali, Selim Mecanna. Do Student Trials Predict What Professionals Value in Sustainable Design Practices? Journal of Mechanical Design. 2019; 141 (10):1-29.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJeremy Faludi; Felix Yiu; Ola Srour; Rami Kamareddine; Omar Ali; Selim Mecanna. 2019. "Do Student Trials Predict What Professionals Value in Sustainable Design Practices?" Journal of Mechanical Design 141, no. 10: 1-29.
Additive manufacturing often has higher environmental impacts per part than traditional manufacturing at scale, but new materials can enable more sustainable 3D printing. This study developed and tested novel materials for paste extrusion printing, and tested materials invented by others. Testing compared their whole-system environmental impacts to standard ABS extrusion, measured by life cycle assessment (LCA); testing also assessed material strength, printability, and cost. Materials were chosen for low print energy (chemical bonding, not melting), low toxicity, and circular life cycle (biodegradable, ideally sourced from waste biomaterial). Printing energy was reduced 75% (from 160 to 40 Wh/part), and embodied impacts of materials were reduced 82% (from 6.6 to 1.2 ReCiPe Endpoint H millipoints/part). Overall impacts per part were reduced 78% (from 27 to 6 ReCiPe Endpoint H millipoints/part), including embodied impacts of the printer itself, in a maximum utilization scenario. Results were also compared to previous studies of seven different 3D printers of various types. More than ten material recipes were tested, and pecan shell flour with sodium silicate showed the best print quality. Strength and print quality did not approach ABS, but material cost was cut by 50%. Thus, while further development is required, some materials show promise for greener additive manufacturing.
Jeremy Faludi; Corrie M. Van Sice; Yuan Shi; Justin Bower; Owen M.K. Brooks. Novel materials can radically improve whole-system environmental impacts of additive manufacturing. Journal of Cleaner Production 2018, 212, 1580 -1590.
AMA StyleJeremy Faludi, Corrie M. Van Sice, Yuan Shi, Justin Bower, Owen M.K. Brooks. Novel materials can radically improve whole-system environmental impacts of additive manufacturing. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018; 212 ():1580-1590.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJeremy Faludi; Corrie M. Van Sice; Yuan Shi; Justin Bower; Owen M.K. Brooks. 2018. "Novel materials can radically improve whole-system environmental impacts of additive manufacturing." Journal of Cleaner Production 212, no. : 1580-1590.
How do designers, engineers, and managers choose the best sustainable design method for their work? How can different design practices combine to complement each other? This study makes recommendations by deconstructing 14 design methods, guides, certifications, and other practices into their constituent activities and mindsets, then characterising those activities and mindsets. For example, some of the seven activity categories are analysis, ideation, and goal-setting; some of the eight mindset categories are priorities, abstract versus concrete goals, and environmental versus social goals. Recommendations are given for matching sustainable design practices to different usage contexts by their constituent activities and mindsets. It also recommends combining design practices by showing which methods/guides/certifications contain complementary activities or mindsets vs. redundant ones. This work should enable designers and engineers to practice more effective and creative sustainable design.
Jeremy Faludi. Recommending sustainable design practices by characterising activities and mindsets. International Journal of Sustainable Design 2017, 3, 100 .
AMA StyleJeremy Faludi. Recommending sustainable design practices by characterising activities and mindsets. International Journal of Sustainable Design. 2017; 3 (2):100.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJeremy Faludi. 2017. "Recommending sustainable design practices by characterising activities and mindsets." International Journal of Sustainable Design 3, no. 2: 100.
This life cycle assessment measured environmental impacts of selective laser melting, to determine where most impacts arise: machine and supporting hardware; aluminum powder material used; or electricity used to print. Machine impacts and aluminum powder impacts were calculated by generating life cycle inventories of materials and processing; electricity use was measured by in-line power meter; transport and disposal were also assessed. Impacts were calculated as energy use (megajoules; MJ), ReCiPe Europe Midpoint H, and ReCiPe Europe Endpoint H/A. Previous research has shown that the efficiency of additive manufacturing depends on machine operation patterns; thus, scenarios were demarcated through notation listing different configurations of machine utilization, system idling, and postbuild part removal. Results showed that electricity use during printing was the dominant impact per part for nearly all scenarios, both in MJ and ReCiPe Endpoint H/A. However, some low-utilization scenarios caused printer embodied impacts to dominate these metrics, and some ReCiPe Midpoint H categories were always dominated by other sources. For printer operators, results indicate that maximizing capacity utilization can reduce impacts per part by a factor of 14 to 18, whereas avoiding electron discharge machining part removal can reduce impacts per part by 25% to 28%. For system designers, results indicate that reductions in energy consumption, both in the printer and auxiliary equipment, could significantly reduce the environmental burden of the process.
Jeremy Faludi; Martin Baumers; Ian Maskery; Richard Hague. Environmental Impacts of Selective Laser Melting: Do Printer, Powder, Or Power Dominate? Journal of Industrial Ecology 2016, 21, 1 .
AMA StyleJeremy Faludi, Martin Baumers, Ian Maskery, Richard Hague. Environmental Impacts of Selective Laser Melting: Do Printer, Powder, Or Power Dominate? Journal of Industrial Ecology. 2016; 21 (S1):1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJeremy Faludi; Martin Baumers; Ian Maskery; Richard Hague. 2016. "Environmental Impacts of Selective Laser Melting: Do Printer, Powder, Or Power Dominate?" Journal of Industrial Ecology 21, no. S1: 1.
This research developed a single-score system to simplify and clarify decision-making in chemical alternatives assessment, accounting for uncertainty. Today, assessing alternatives to hazardous constituent chemicals is a difficult task—rather than comparing alternatives by a single definitive score, many independent toxicological variables must be considered at once, and data gaps are rampant. Thus, most hazard assessments are only comprehensible to toxicologists, but business leaders and politicians need simple scores to make decisions. In addition, they must balance hazard against other considerations, such as product functionality, and they must be aware of the high degrees of uncertainty in chemical hazard data. This research proposes a transparent, reproducible method to translate eighteen hazard endpoints into a simple numeric score with quantified uncertainty, alongside a similar product functionality score, to aid decisions between alternative products. The scoring method uses Clean Production Action's GreenScreen as a guide, but with a different method of score aggregation. It provides finer differentiation between scores than GreenScreen's four-point scale, and it displays uncertainty quantitatively in the final score. Displaying uncertainty also illustrates which alternatives are early in product development versus well-defined commercial products. This paper tested the proposed assessment method through a case study in the building industry, assessing alternatives to spray polyurethane foam insulation containing methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI). The new hazard scoring method successfully identified trade-offs between different alternatives, showing finer resolution than GreenScreen Benchmarking. Sensitivity analysis showed that different weighting schemes in hazard scores had almost no effect on alternatives ranking, compared to uncertainty from data gaps.
Jeremy Faludi; Tina Hoang; Patrick Gorman; Martin Mulvihill. Aiding alternatives assessment with an uncertainty-tolerant hazard scoring method. Journal of Environmental Management 2016, 182, 111 -125.
AMA StyleJeremy Faludi, Tina Hoang, Patrick Gorman, Martin Mulvihill. Aiding alternatives assessment with an uncertainty-tolerant hazard scoring method. Journal of Environmental Management. 2016; 182 ():111-125.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJeremy Faludi; Tina Hoang; Patrick Gorman; Martin Mulvihill. 2016. "Aiding alternatives assessment with an uncertainty-tolerant hazard scoring method." Journal of Environmental Management 182, no. : 111-125.
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to compare the environmental impacts of two additive manufacturing machines to a traditional computer numerical control (CNC) milling machine to determine which method is the most sustainable. Design/methodology/approach – A life-cycle assessment (LCA) was performed, comparing a Haas VF0 CNC mill to two methods of additive manufacturing: a Dimension 1200BST FDM and an Objet Connex 350 “inkjet”/“polyjet”. The LCA’s functional unit was the manufacturing of two specific parts in acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) plastic or similar polymer, as required by the machines. The scope was cradle to grave, including embodied impacts, transportation, energy used during manufacturing, energy used while idling and in standby, material used in final parts, waste material generated, cutting fluid for CNC, and disposal. Several scenarios were considered, all scored using the ReCiPe Endpoint H and IMPACT 2002+ methodologies. Findings – Results showed that the sustainability of additive manufacturing vs CNC machining depends primarily on the per cent utilization of each machine. Higher utilization both reduces idling energy use and amortizes the embodied impacts of each machine. For both three-dimensional (3D) printers, electricity use is always the dominant impact, but for CNC at maximum utilization, material waste became dominant, and cutting fluid was roughly on par with electricity use. At both high and low utilization, the fused deposition modeling (FDM) machine had the lowest ecological impacts per part. The inkjet machine sometimes performed better and sometimes worse than CNC, depending on idle time/energy and on process parameters. Research limitations/implications – The study only compared additive manufacturing in plastic, and did not include other additive manufacturing technologies, such as selective laser sintering or stereolithography. It also does not include post-processing that might bring the surface finish of FDM parts up to the quality of inkjet or CNC parts. Practical implications – Designers and engineers seeking to minimize the environmental impacts of their prototypes should share high-utilization machines, and are advised to use FDM machines over CNC mills or polyjet machines if they provide sufficient quality of surface finish. Originality/value – This is the first paper quantitatively comparing the environmental impacts of additive manufacturing with traditional machining. It also provides a more comprehensive measurement of environmental impacts than most studies of either milling or additive manufacturing alone – it includes not merely CO2 emissions or waste but also acidification, eutrophication, human toxicity, ecotoxicity and other impact categories. Designers, engineers and job shop managers may use the results to guide sourcing or purchasing decisions related to rapid prototyping.
Jeremy Faludi; Cindy Bayley; Suraj Bhogal; Myles Iribarne. Comparing environmental impacts of additive manufacturing vs traditional machining via life-cycle assessment. Rapid Prototyping Journal 2015, 21, 14 -33.
AMA StyleJeremy Faludi, Cindy Bayley, Suraj Bhogal, Myles Iribarne. Comparing environmental impacts of additive manufacturing vs traditional machining via life-cycle assessment. Rapid Prototyping Journal. 2015; 21 (1):14-33.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJeremy Faludi; Cindy Bayley; Suraj Bhogal; Myles Iribarne. 2015. "Comparing environmental impacts of additive manufacturing vs traditional machining via life-cycle assessment." Rapid Prototyping Journal 21, no. 1: 14-33.