Metal additive manufacturing uses more than three times the energy per kilogram of material than conventional CNC machining—80.5 kilowatt-hours versus 23—and suffers from higher part-failure rates that waste even more energy. This matters because metals production already accounts for 7% of global energy use, and additive manufacturing (AM) has been promoted as a greener alternative without solid evidence to back it up. No comprehensive comparison of energy consumption across different AM processes exists, and the full lifecycle—from feedstock production through printing, post-processing, and material reuse—has been largely ignored. The SAMRCD project aims to build digital tools that monitor, analyse, predict, and flag energy impacts and process deviations in real time. If successful, these tools would help manufacturers decide when and how to use AM versus conventional methods, reduce waste from failed prints, and accelerate AM’s maturity as a sustainable production process. For the UK’s manufacturing sector, this could mean lower carbon emissions and more efficient use of materials without sacrificing part quality.
View original technical description
Metals production, from mining ore through manufacturing parts, accounts for 7% of global energy use. While metal additive manufacturing (AM) has been promoted as a way to help us reduce our carbon footprint, this has not been well demonstrated with clear and complete information. Furthermore, there lacks a comprehensive comparison of energy consumption by the different AM processes. To optimize when, where, which, and how to implement AM, we must be able to assess its environmental impact and compare this to conventional manufacturing processes like CNC Machining. For effective analysis, we must consider the whole manufacturing lifecycle. This includes all the steps from feedstock manufacturing, printing, post-processing, and any material reuse along the way. Continuing studies and analysis will only achieve so much, the need to implement digital tools that can monitor, analyse, predict and alert a range of impact and deviations in standard operating procedures is fundamental to continue the maturing of a manufacturing process which has already had an impact on material efficiency. The process of AM is sensitive to many factors, and while AM opens many design efficiencies, such as part consolidation, the energy impact from materials requiring conditioning, not meeting required standards and the time taken to develop build parameters to ensure build by build stability is key to reducing energy use. A print failure has tremendous energy impact. A CNC machine will use 23 KWh per Kg of material removed, with a high rate of success in part quality. Compared to AM and L-PBF which uses on average 80.5 KWh per Kg of material added. Part acceptance rates for L-PBF are lower than a CNC Machine. For every 100kg of material processed, assuming an equal 10% part-failure rate, 805 KWh of energy would be wasted versus the 230KWh for CNC. The development of the tools proposed within the SAMCRD project would make a profound impact in energy reduction and accelerate additive manufacturing as a viable sustainable production process as part of the UK's manufacturing capabilities.
Plain English summaries and category classifications on this site are generated by AI and may not perfectly reflect the original research.
Is something wrong? Let us know