Life cycle assessment of nanocomposite manufactured using ultrasonic stir casting
Source abstract
Abstract
The foundry industry is increasingly feeling the heat of the narrowing climate change-related regulations on a global level and is being labelled as a “dirty” industry. With an aim to analyse the environmentally sustainable functioning of modern foundries, the presented study has been conducted. It evaluates the manufacturing process of an aluminium & titanium-based metal matrix nanocomposite prepared using the stir casting technique. The life cycle assessment has been performed with ReCiPe 2016 endpoint (H) and midpoint (H) approaches. The overall engenderment process has been divided into four subdivisions, namely aluminium procurement subdivision (SD1), TiO2 nanoparticle procurement subdivision (SD2), mould fabrication & procurement subdivision (SD3), and nanocomposite fabrication subdivision (SD4). The outcome of the impact assessment reveals that when considering the endpoint approach, the SD4 accounts for 70.34% of the total impact score followed by SD1 at 26.08%, while SD2 and SD3 contributed frivolously at 0.05 and 3.52%, respectively. Furthermore, utilizing the ReCiPe midpoint method, it has been revealed that SD4 contributes 56.37% of the overall impact while SD1, SD2, and SD3 contribute 36.34, 0.04, and 7.25%, respectively. From the end-of-life point of view, it has been ascertained that about 75.34% of the impact arises from the product phase while 24.66% comes from waste treatment. Furthermore, it has additionally been highlighted that a shift from coal-predicated electricity generation to renewable sources such as hydro-electric, wind, or solar shall play a vital role in revoking its detrimental effects.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Recycling and Waste Management Techniques · Recycled Aggregate Concrete Performance · Bauxite Residue and Utilization
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (53)
Show source-provided references
1. Garetti M, Taisch M (2012) Sustainable manufacturing: trends and research challenges. Prod Plan Control 23:83–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2011.59161910.1080/09537287.2011.591619 ↗
2. Scharf S, Sander B, Kujath M et al (2021) FOUNDRY 4.0: an innovative technology for sustainable and flexible process design in foundries. Procedia CIRP 98:73–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2021.01.00810.1016/j.procir.2021.01.008 ↗
3. Rebelato M, Saran L, Cury V, Rodrigues A (2017) Environmental performance analysis: foundry industry case report. Manag Environ Qual An Int J 28:248–263. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-09-2015-017610.1108/MEQ-09-2015-0176 ↗
4. EUROGUSS (2019) Resource Efficiency and Environmental Protection in the Die Casting Industry, pp 4–7
5. Salonitis K, Zeng B, Mehrabi HA, Jolly M (2016) the challenges for energy efficient casting processes. Procedia CIRP 40:24–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.01.04310.1016/j.procir.2016.01.043 ↗
6. Salonitis K, Jolly MR, Zeng B, Mehrabi H (2016) Improvements in energy consumption and environmental impact by novel single shot melting process for casting. J Clean Prod 1996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.16510.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.165 ↗
7. Trianni A, Cagno E (2012) Dealing with barriers to energy efficiency and SMEs: Some empirical evidences. Energy 37:494–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2011.11.00510.1016/j.energy.2011.11.005 ↗
8. Peng T, Ou X, Yan X, Wang G (2019) Life-cycle analysis of energy consumption and GHG emissions of aluminium production in China. Energy Proc 158:3937–3943. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2019.01.84910.1016/j.egypro.2019.01.849 ↗
9. Alfarisi S, Sutopo W (2020) Life cycle energy and environmental impact assessment of CRIMSON sand casting on intake manifold production process life cycle energy and environmental impact assessment of CRIMSON Sand casting on intake manifold production process. AIP Conf Proc, 03006110.1063/5.0000498 ↗
10. Saha VJ (2010) Energy efficiency improvement in melting furnaces, report. World
11. Salonitis K, Jolly MR, Zeng B, Mehrabi H (2016) Improvements in energy consumption and environmental impact by novel single shot melting process for casting. J Clean Prod 137:1532–1542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.16510.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.165 ↗
12. DETR (1997) Department of the Environment Transport and the Regions
13. Joshi D, Modi Y, Ravi B (2011) Evaluating environmental impacts of sand cast products using life cycle assessment. Res Des Support Sustain Prod Dev Indian Inst Sci Bangalore, India, pp 978–981
14. Mitterpach J, Hroncová E, Ladomerský J, Balco K (2017) Environmental evaluation of grey cast iron via life cycle assessment. J Clean Prod 148:324–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.02.02310.1016/j.jclepro.2017.02.023 ↗
15. Yadav A, Jamwal A, Agrawal R, Kumar A (2021) Environmental impacts assessment during sand casting of Aluminium LM04 product: A case of Indian manufacturing industry. Procedia CIRP 98:181–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2021.01.02710.1016/j.procir.2021.01.027 ↗
16. Eickemeier P, Schlömer S, Farahani E et al (2014) Climate change 2014 mitigation of climate change working group III contribution to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change
17. Hemanth J (2009) Quartz (SiO2P) reinforced chilled metal matrix composite (CMMC) for automotive applications. Mater Des 30:323–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2008.04.06410.1016/j.matdes.2008.04.064 ↗
18. Vijayaram DT (2016) A Review on Aluminium Matrix Hybrid Composites by Semisolid Processing and its Process Parameters. Int J Eng Techol 2(5), 116 - 124,
19. Prasad DS, Shoba C, Ramanaiah N (2014) Investigations on mechanical properties of aluminum hybrid composites. J Mater Res Technol 3:79–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2013.11.00210.1016/j.jmrt.2013.11.002 ↗
20. Prasad DS, Shoba C, Ramanaiah N (2014) Investigations on mechanical properties of aluminum hybrid composites. J Mater Res Technol 3:79–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2013.11.00210.1016/j.jmrt.2013.11.002 ↗
21. Gómez J, Verdú M, González-Megías A et al (2016) The phylogenetic roots of human lethal violence. Nature 538:233–237. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature1975810.1038/nature19758 ↗
22. Zuhailawati H, Halmy MN, Almanar IP et al (2016) Mechanical properties of friction stir processed 1100 aluminum reinforced with rice husk ash silica at different rotational speeds. Int J Metall Mater Eng 2:2–7. https://doi.org/10.15344/2455-2372/2016/12010.15344/2455-2372/2016/120 ↗
23. Cecchel S, Ferrario D (2016) Light materials for heavy applications. A&L alluminio e leghe
24. Kamaraj L, Hariharasakthisudhan P, Arul Marcel Moshi A (2021) Optimizing the ultrasonication effect in stir-casting process of aluminum hybrid composite using desirability function approach and artificial neural network. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part L J Mater Des Appl 235:2007–2021. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464420721102570610.1177/14644207211025706 ↗
25. Almeida-Neto M, Guimarães P, Guimarães PR Jr, Loyola RD, Ulrich W (2008) A consistent metric for nestedness analysis in ecological systems: reconciling concept and measurement. Oikos 117:1227–1239. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0030-1299.2008.16644.x10.1111/j.0030-1299.2008.16644.x ↗
26. Singh J, Alba-Baena N, Trehan R, Sharma VS (2021) An experimental study on mechanical properties and wear of A380/nB4C composites fabricated using two different liquid state processes. Sādhanā 46:233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-021-01760-810.1007/s12046-021-01760-8 ↗
27. Idrisi AH, Mourad AHI (2019) Conventional stir casting versus ultrasonic assisted stir casting process: Mechanical and physical characteristics of AMCs. J Alloys Compd 805:502–508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2019.07.07610.1016/j.jallcom.2019.07.076 ↗
28. Vasile C, Bumbu G, Mylonas Y, Cojocaru I, Staikos G (2003) Hydrogen-bonding interaction of an alternating maleic acid–vinyl acetate copolymer with poly(ethylene glycol), polyacrylamide and poly(N-isopropylacrylamide): a comparative study. Polym. Int. 52:1887–1891. https://doi.org/10.1002/pi.127410.1002/pi.1274 ↗
29. Asgari A, Sedighi M, Krajnik P (2019) Magnesium alloy-silicon carbide composite fabrication using chips waste. J Clean Prod 232:1187–1194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.01810.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.018 ↗
30. Stephens M, Smith NJ, Donnelly P (2001) A new statistical method for haplotype reconstruction from population data. Am J Hum Genet. 68(4):978–989. https://doi.org/10.1086/31950110.1086/319501 ↗
31. Kamaraj M, Kamble S, Sonia SVRKN (2021) Facile synthesis of silica composites with oil sorption efficiency from a vital agricultural waste of corn stalk cultivated in Bishoftu. Ethiopia. Adsorpt. Sci. Technol. 2021:7205135. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/720513510.1155/2021/7205135 ↗
32. The Aluminum Association (2018) Designation and Chemical composition limits for Al-alloys in the form of castings and ingots. Alum Assoc, 21
33. Mathivanan S, Eniyavan G, Ilavarasan A, Karthik B (2019) A review paper of Al 7075 metal matrix composition. Int Jounal Eng Res Technol 7:1–5
34. Al-Lubani SE, Ateyat AI (2020) Double Aging of Heat-Treated Aluminum Alloy of (7075) and (6061) to Increase the Hardness Number. Springer International Publishing, Berlin10.1007/978-3-030-49882-5_4 ↗
35. ASTM (2003) Standard specification for aluminum-alloy sand castings, B 26/B 26M. ASTM international
36. AZoM (2022) Aluminium / Aluminum 6061 Alloy ( UNS A96061 ). AZoM.com 7
37. ISO (2006) ISO 14040 International Standard. Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework. Int Organ Stand (ISO), Geneva Switzerland, 20
38. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (2006) International Standard ISO 14044 Environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelines Management. Work, pp 0–90
39. Golsteijn L (2022) Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) explained. In: pre-sustainability. https://pre-sustainability.com/articles/life-cycle-assessment-lca-basics/. Accessed 27 Feb 2023
40. Rebitzer G, Ekvall T, Frischknecht R et al (2004) Life cycle assessment part 1: framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, and applications. Environ Int 30:701–720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2003.11.00510.1016/j.envint.2003.11.005 ↗
41. Abdollahi J, Emrani N, Chahkandi B et al (2021) Environmental impact assessment of aluminium production using the life cycle assessment tool and multi-criteria analysis. Ann Environ Sci Toxicol, 8. https://doi.org/10.17352/aest.00003810.17352/aest.000038 ↗
42. Kampa M, Castanas E (2008) Human health effects of air pollution. Environ Pollut 151:362–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2007.06.01210.1016/j.envpol.2007.06.012 ↗
43. Hertwich EG, Mateles SF, Pease WS, McKone TE (2001) Human toxicity potentials for life-cycle assessment and toxics release inventory risk screening. Environ Toxicol Chem 20:928–939. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.562020043110.1002/etc.5620200431 ↗
44. Sakulniyomporn S, Kubaha K, Chullabodhi C (2011) External costs of fossil electricity generation: Health-based assessment in Thailand. Renew Sustain Energy Rev Renew Sustain Energy Rev 15:3470–3479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.05.00410.1016/j.rser.2011.05.004 ↗
45. Felix M, Gheewala SH (2014) Environmental toxicity potential from electricity generation in Tanzania. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:1424–1432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-014-0748-810.1007/s11367-014-0748-8 ↗
46. GOI (2022) Generation of Thermal Power from Raw Coal. Cent Electr Auth https://coal.nic.in/en/major-statistics/generation-of-thermal-power-from-raw-coal. Accessed 27 Feb 2023
47. Nautiyal H, Singal SK, Varun SA (2011) Small hydropower for sustainable energy development in India. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 15:2021–2027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.01.00610.1016/j.rser.2011.01.006 ↗
48. Khan R (2015) Small Hydro Power in India: Is it a sustainable business? Appl Energy 152:207–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.11.06310.1016/j.apenergy.2014.11.063 ↗
49. Ikegami M, Wang Z (2016) The long-run causal relationship between electricity consumption and real GDP: evidence from Japan and Germany. J Policy Model 38:767–784. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2016.10.00710.1016/j.jpolmod.2016.10.007 ↗
50. Khare V, Nema S, Baredar P (2013) Status of solar wind renewable energy in India. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 27:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.06.01810.1016/j.rser.2013.06.018 ↗
51. Thapar S, Sharma S, Verma A (2018) Key determinants of wind energy growth in India: analysis of policy and non-policy factors. Energy Policy 122:622–638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.08.00410.1016/j.enpol.2018.08.004 ↗
52. Deshmukh R, Wu GC, Callaway DS, Phadke A (2019) Geospatial and techno-economic analysis of wind and solar resources in India. Renew Energy 134:947–960. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.11.07310.1016/j.renene.2018.11.073 ↗
53. Gao M, Ding Y, Song S et al (2018) Secular decrease of wind power potential in India associated with warming in the Indian Ocean. Sci Adv 4:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aat525610.1126/sciadv.aat5256 ↗