Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

Initial analysis of cost, energy and carbon dioxide emissions in single point incremental forming - producing an aluminium hat

dc.contributor.authorBranker, K
dc.contributor.authorAdams, D.
dc.contributor.authorJeswiet, Jack
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-13T22:19:18Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.date.updated2016-02-24T09:03:00Z
dc.description.abstractIn this paper, an initial analysis of cost, energy and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions that occur in producing a unique aluminium hat using single point incremental forming (SPIF) for two scenarios is performed. The aluminium hat was custom designed and made from Al-3003 O and is formed using a custom steel alloy SPIF tool and vertical computer numeric control (CNC) mill. The second scenario (S2) involved doubling the feed rate and step down increment of the first scenario (S1), as well as using an eco-benign lubricant. The cost and energy used for the SPIF process without labour were found to be $4.48 and 4580 kJ (1.27 kWh) for S1 and $4.10 and 1420 kJ (0.39 kWh) for S2, respectively. The respective direct electrical energy required for making the hat was only 16% and 27% of the total required process energy for S1 and S2. Using virgin or traditional emission intensity inputs for the tool, lubricant, workpiece and energy, the embodied CO2 from the process was found to be 4.48 kg CO2e for S1. However, using 33% recycled aluminium, an eco-benign lubricant and a remanufactured tool resulted in an embodied CO2 of 3.24 kg CO2e or a 28% CO2 savings for the same process parameters. Similarly, in S2, the embodied CO2 was found to be 4.28 kg CO2e for traditional inputs and 3.09 kg CO2e for modified inputs. Comparing S1 traditional and S2 modified, there is a reduction in energy use and CO2 by 69% and 31% accordingly. As expected, the stock material dominated the embodied CO2 and cost, but the energy consumed was the next highest contributor. Future work will consider optimal parameters for cost, energy and embodied CO2 minimisation.
dc.identifier.issn1939-7038
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1885/71723
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis Group
dc.sourceInternational Journal of Sustainable Engineering
dc.subjectKeywords: Carbon dioxide emissions; Computer numeric control; Electrical energy; Emission intensity; energy; Energy use; Feed-rates; Optimal parameter; Process energy; Process parameters; Single point incremental forming; Step down; Stock materials; Work pieces; Al carbon dioxide; cost; energy; single point incremental forming
dc.titleInitial analysis of cost, energy and carbon dioxide emissions in single point incremental forming - producing an aluminium hat
dc.typeJournal article
local.bibliographicCitation.issue3
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage198
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage188
local.contributor.affiliationBranker, K, Queen's University
local.contributor.affiliationAdams, D., Queen's University
local.contributor.affiliationJeswiet, Jack, College of Engineering and Computer Science, ANU
local.contributor.authoruidJeswiet, Jack, t1392
local.description.embargo2037-12-31
local.description.notesImported from ARIES
local.identifier.absfor090403 - Chemical Engineering Design
local.identifier.ariespublicationf5625xPUB2850
local.identifier.citationvolume5
local.identifier.doi10.1080/19397038.2011.634033
local.identifier.scopusID2-s2.0-84865259378
local.type.statusPublished Version

Downloads

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
01_Branker_Initial_analysis_of_cost,_2012.pdf
Size:
544.65 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format