IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/inecol/v24y2020i5p1158-1170.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing energy and water use of aqueous and gas‐based metalworking fluids

Author

Listed:
  • Sarang D. Supekar
  • Diane J. Graziano
  • Steven J. Skerlos
  • Joseph Cresko

Abstract

Gas‐based metalworking fluids (MWFs) have been proposed as alternative coolants and lubricants in machining operations to mitigate concerns surrounding water use and pollution, industrial hygiene, occupational health, and performance limitations associated with water‐based (aqueous) MWFs that are ubiquitously used in the metals manufacturing industry. This study compares the primary energy and water use associated with the consumptive use, delivery, and disposal of aqueous MWFs with three gas‐based MWFs in the literature—minimum quantity lubricant‐in‐compressed air (MQL), liquid/gaseous N2, and liquid/supercritical CO2. The comparison accounts for reported differences in machining performance in peer‐reviewed experimental studies across several machining processes and materials. The analysis shows that despite the reported improvement in tool life with N2 and CO2‐based MWFs, the electricity‐ and water‐intensive separation and purification processes for N2 and CO2 lead to their higher primary energy and water use per volume of material machined relative to water‐based MWFs. Although MQL is found to have lower primary energy use, significant consumptive water use associated with the vegetable oil commonly used with this MWF leads to higher overall water use than aqueous MWF, which is operated in a recirculative system. Gas‐based MWFs thus shift the water use upstream of the manufacturing plant. Primary energy and water use of gas‐based MWFs could be reduced by focusing on achieving higher material removal rates and throughput compared to aqueous MWF instead of solely targeting improvements in tool life. Additionally, the consumptive use of CO2 and N2 MWFs could be minimized by optimizing their flow rates and delivery to precisely meet the cooling and lubrication needs of specific machining processes instead of flooding the tool and workpiece with these gases. This article met the requirements for a gold–gold JIE data openness badge described at http://jie.click/badges.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarang D. Supekar & Diane J. Graziano & Steven J. Skerlos & Joseph Cresko, 2020. "Comparing energy and water use of aqueous and gas‐based metalworking fluids," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(5), pages 1158-1170, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:24:y:2020:i:5:p:1158-1170
    DOI: 10.1111/jiec.12992
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12992
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jiec.12992?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:24:y:2020:i:5:p:1158-1170. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1088-1980 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.