1. Technical control of nanoparticle emissions from desktop 3D printing
- Author
-
Arto Säämänen, Tomi Kanerva, Kaarle Hämeri, Anna-Kaisa Viitanen, Kimmo Kallonen, Tareq Hussein, Erkka Saukko, Kirsi Kukko, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, University of Helsinki, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Pegasor Oy, Aalto-yliopisto, Aalto University, Helsinki Institute of Physics, Institute for Atmospheric and Earth System Research (INAR), and Air quality research group
- Subjects
Environmental Engineering ,010504 meteorology & atmospheric sciences ,Particle number ,Nozzle ,Enclosure ,3D printing ,010501 environmental sciences ,desktop 3D printing ,7. Clean energy ,01 natural sciences ,114 Physical sciences ,contaminant control ,risk management ,Automotive engineering ,law.invention ,3d printer ,SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being ,law ,Ultrafine particle ,Particle Size ,0105 earth and related environmental sciences ,business.industry ,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health ,Building and Construction ,Aerosol ,ultrafine particles ,13. Climate action ,Air Pollution, Indoor ,Ventilation (architecture) ,Printing, Three-Dimensional ,Environmental science ,Nanoparticles ,nanoparticle emission ,Particulate Matter ,business ,indoor air modeling - Abstract
Material extrusion (ME) desktop 3D printing is known to strongly emit nanoparticles (NP), and the need for risk management has been recognized widely. Four different engineering control measures were studied in real-life office conditions by means of online NP measurements and indoor aerosol modeling. The studied engineering control measures were general ventilation, local exhaust ventilation (LEV), retrofitted enclosure, and retrofitted enclosure with LEV. Efficiency between different control measures was compared based on particle number and surface area (SA) concentrations from which SA concentration was found to be more reliable. The study found out that for regular or long-time use of ME desktop 3D printers, the general ventilation is not sufficient control measure for NP emissions. Also, the LEV with canopy hood attached above the 3D printer did not control the emission remarkably and successful position of the hood in relation to the nozzle was found challenging. Retrofitted enclosure attached to the LEV reduced the NP emissions 96% based on SA concentration. Retrofitted enclosure is nearly as efficient as enclosure attached to the LEV (reduction of 89% based on SA concentration) but may be considered more practical solution than enclosure with LEV.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF