IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i21p12275-d673777.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life Cycle Environmental and Economic Comparison of Water Droplet Machining and Traditional Abrasive Waterjet Cutting

Author

Listed:
  • Giovanni Guglielmi

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824, USA)

  • Benjamin Mitchell

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824, USA)

  • Cuihong Song

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824, USA)

  • Brad L. Kinsey

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824, USA)

  • Weiwei Mo

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824, USA)

Abstract

Abrasive waterjet (AWJ) cutting is a manufacturing technique, which uses a high-speed waterjet as the transport medium for abrasive particles to erode and cut through metal workpieces. The use of abrasives has significant environmental impacts and leads to the high operating costs of AWJ cutting. Therefore, it is important to investigate whether other metal cutting approaches can perform the same tasks with reduced environmental and economic impacts. One such manufacturing innovation is water droplet machining (WDM). In this process, the waterjet, which is immersed in a sub-atmospheric pressure environment, is discretized into a train of high velocity water droplets, which are able to erode and cut through the metal workpiece without abrasives. However, the cutting velocity of WDM is two orders of magnitude slower than AWJ. In this paper, a comparative life cycle and life cycle cost assessments were performed to determine which waterjet cutting technology is more beneficial to the environment and cost-efficient, considering their impacts from cradle to grave. The results show lower environmental and economic impacts for AWJ compared to WDM due to the AWJ’s ability to cut more metal over the service life than the WDM. Further sensitivity analyses give insight into how the change in abrasive rate is the most sensitive input for the AWJ, whereas the machine lifetime and electricity usage are the most sensitive inputs for the WDM. These results provide a valuable comparison between these alternative waterjet cutting technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Giovanni Guglielmi & Benjamin Mitchell & Cuihong Song & Brad L. Kinsey & Weiwei Mo, 2021. "Life Cycle Environmental and Economic Comparison of Water Droplet Machining and Traditional Abrasive Waterjet Cutting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-18, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:21:p:12275-:d:673777
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/21/12275/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/21/12275/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:21:p:12275-:d:673777. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.