The August 2022 issue of IEEE Spectrum is here!

Close bar

Nanoparticles Emitted from 3D Printers Could Pose a Risk

Emission rates are on par with other household devices, but the particles may be more toxic

2 min read
Nanoparticles Emitted from 3D Printers Could Pose a Risk

The migration of 3D printer technology from factory settings to people’s homes has triggered mainstream excitement about the technology's potential. In fact, it has even turned gun control laws on their ear after it was demonstrated that you could build a fully functional firearm with one of these 3-D printers.

What buyers of these systems may not have considered is that operating them could expose them to toxic nanoparticles. The hobbyist may now have to think about this potential risk when operating a 3-D printer in a garage or other indoor environment because of research out of the Illinois Institute of Technology showing that commercially available desktop 3-D printers emitted potentially harmful nanoparticles that could accumulate in indoor environments.

The research, which was published in the journal Atmospheric Environment (“Ultrafine particle emissions from desktop 3D printers”), demonstrated that common, commercially available 3-D printers available for home use emitted between 20 and 200 billion ultrafine particles (UFPs) per minute. The UFPs are, by definition, nanoparticles because their diameters are no larger than 10 nanometers.

The wide size range for the UFPs is due to the different kinds of printing technology used. A 3-D printer that uses a lower temperature polylactic acid (PLA) feedstock emits about 20 billion UFPs per minute whereas a higher temperature acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) feedstock printer produces about 200 billion UFPs per minute.

Alarming as these figures may sound, these emission rates are about on par with what is generated from “cooking on a gas or electric stove, burning scented candles, operating laser printers, or even burning a cigarette,” according to the story covering the research. It’s hard to imagine that candles and gas stoves need to be eliminated from people’s homes. So, what gives?

The real measurement of risk involves not only the level of exposure we have to a given material but the hazard associated with that material because of its unique properties. UFPs generated by the 3-D printers the researchers studied had varying degrees of toxicity, depending on the feedstock they used. While PLA-generated UFPs have actually been shown to be biocompatible with mammals, previous studies have demonstrated that thermal decomposition byproducts from ABS processing have toxic effects in mice and rats.

The researchers remain somewhat circumspect about how this risk should be addressed. Their main advice: the operator of a home 3-D printer should ensure that the place where the machine is stationed is adequately ventilated, thereby reducing the exposure to the UFPs. Nonetheless, they note that more research needs to be performed to evaluate the risk from these 3-D printers.

Photo: Illinois Institute of Technology

The Conversation (0)

The First Million-Transistor Chip: the Engineers’ Story

Intel’s i860 RISC chip was a graphics powerhouse

21 min read
Twenty people crowd into a cubicle, the man in the center seated holding a silicon wafer full of chips

Intel's million-transistor chip development team

In San Francisco on Feb. 27, 1989, Intel Corp., Santa Clara, Calif., startled the world of high technology by presenting the first ever 1-million-transistor microprocessor, which was also the company’s first such chip to use a reduced instruction set.

The number of transistors alone marks a huge leap upward: Intel’s previous microprocessor, the 80386, has only 275,000 of them. But this long-deferred move into the booming market in reduced-instruction-set computing (RISC) was more of a shock, in part because it broke with Intel’s tradition of compatibility with earlier processors—and not least because after three well-guarded years in development the chip came as a complete surprise. Now designated the i860, it entered development in 1986 about the same time as the 80486, the yet-to-be-introduced successor to Intel’s highly regarded 80286 and 80386. The two chips have about the same area and use the same 1-micrometer CMOS technology then under development at the company’s systems production and manufacturing plant in Hillsboro, Ore. But with the i860, then code-named the N10, the company planned a revolution.

Keep Reading ↓Show less