Identification of effective control technologies for additive manufacturing
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

For very narrow results

When looking for a specific result

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Dates

to

Document Data
Library
People
Clear All
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

CDC STACKS serves as an archival repository of CDC-published products including scientific findings, journal articles, guidelines, recommendations, or other public health information authored or co-authored by CDC or funded partners. As a repository, CDC STACKS retains documents in their original published format to ensure public access to scientific information.
i

Identification of effective control technologies for additive manufacturing

Filetype[PDF-1.04 MB]


English

Details:

  • Alternative Title:
    J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev
  • Personal Author:
  • Description:
    Additive manufacturing (AM) refers to several types of processes that join materials to build objects, often layer-by-layer, from a computer-aided design file. Many AM processes release potentially hazardous particles and gases during printing and associated tasks. There is limited understanding of the efficacy of controls including elimination, substitution, administrative, and personal protective technologies to reduce or remove emissions, which is an impediment to implementation of risk mitigation strategies. The Medline, Embase, Environmental Science Collection, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science databases and other resources were used to identify 42 articles that met the inclusion criteria for this review. Key findings were as follows: 1) engineering controls for material extrusion-type fused filament fabrication (FFF) 3-D printers and material jetting printers that included local exhaust ventilation generally exhibited higher efficacy to decrease particle and gas levels compared with isolation alone, and 2) engineering controls for particle emissions from FFF 3-D printers displayed higher efficacy for ultrafine particles compared with fine particles and in test chambers compared with real-world settings. Critical knowledge gaps identified included a need for data: 1) on efficacy of controls for all AM process types, 2) better understanding approaches to control particles over a range of sizes and gas-phase emissions, 3) obtained using a standardized collection approach to facilitate inter-comparison of study results, 4) approaches that go beyond the inhalation exposure pathway to include controls to minimize dermal exposures, and 5) to evaluate not just the engineering tier, but also the prevention-through-design and other tiers of the hierarchy of controls.
  • Subjects:
  • Source:
  • Pubmed ID:
    35758103
  • Pubmed Central ID:
    PMC9420827
  • Document Type:
  • Funding:
  • Volume:
    25
  • Issue:
    5
  • Collection(s):
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • Download URL:
  • File Type:

You May Also Like

Checkout today's featured content at stacks.cdc.gov