Paper Titles
Processability of Recycled Polypropylene for More Sustainable Pellet-Based 3D Printing
p.21
Reuse of Fiber Reinforced Polymer Waste in MSLA 3D Printing: Mechanical Properties and Sustainability Assessment
p.29
Investigation of Microstructure Evolution during AA6082 Chips Recycling through Friction Consolidation
p.41
Climate Change Impact of Innovative Structural Aluminium Reinforced Concrete, a Case Study in Norway
p.49
Sustainability-Driven Business Model in Mold Manufacturing: A Multi-Criteria Comparison between Conventional and Additive Technologies
p.61
Green Hydrogen vs Conventional Energy Sources: A LCA Case Study of Aluminum Casting
p.73
Overcoming Copper Limitations in Scrap Recycling via Twin-Roll Casting
p.83
Recycling of Plastic Waste by Integrating Extrusion and Additive Manufacturing Techniques: Lessons Learned from RELIVE Project
p.93
A Novel One-Shot Forming Process Integrating Hot Form Quench (HFQ) of High-Strength Aluminium for Fibre–Metal Laminate (FML) Panel Parts
p.105

Sustainability-Driven Business Model in Mold Manufacturing: A Multi-Criteria Comparison between Conventional and Additive Technologies

Article Preview
View Pdf By email

Abstract:

The growing demand for high-performance, sustainable micro-moulded components requires integrated approaches to material and process selection. The study presents a Life Cycle Engineering (LCE) framework for the integrated selection of materials and manufacturing technologies for micro-injection molds, combining Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Life Cycle Costing (LCC), and multi-criteria decision models. The methodology implements multicriteria cost impact maps and ternary LCA–LCC–technical performance model, allowing for result normalization and sensitivity analysis with respect to criterion weighting. The framework is applied to molds fabricated from steel, aluminium alloy, polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK), and high-temperature resin, using both subtractive and additive processes, with topological optimization. Mass reductions of up to 22% achieved through optimization translate into cost and environmental impact savings of 30–45% during production and use phases, although with potential service life reductions of up to 50% for polymeric materials. LCA and LCC analyses highlight production and use as the dominant life cycle phases, with end-of-life (EoL) impacts being comparatively minor. Sensitivity analysis shows that: (i) cost-prioritized scenarios select optimized steel molds; (ii) scenarios prioritizing lightweight design and environmental performance select advanced polymers and additive manufacturing; (iii) balanced scenarios identify PEEK as the optimal solution. The proposed framework enables the concurrent selection of material and technology aligned with design objectives and geometric optimization, providing quali-quantitative support for sustainability-oriented industrial decision-making across the life cycle.

You have full access to the following eBook
Sustainability on Material Forming Read eBook

Info:

Periodical:

Key Engineering Materials (Volume 1051)

Pages:

61-71

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/p-9JSPCw

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

April 2026

Authors:

Francesco Borda*, Vito Basile, Francesco Gagliardi, Luigino Filice

Keywords:

LCC, Life Cycle Assessment, Multi-Criteria Tool, Sustainability, Topological Optimization

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Permissions:

Creative Commons CC BY 4.0

Share:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

References

[1] M. Radha Raman, T. Visnu, S. Rajesha, A Study of Tensile Strength of MIG and TIG Welded Dissimilar Joints of Mild Steel and Stainless Steel, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing and Systems Engineering, vol. 3, 2014, p.23–32

DOI: 10.14810/ijamse.2014.3203

Google Scholar

[2] M. Z. Hauschild, R. K. Rosenbaum, S. I. Olsen (Eds.), Life Cycle Assessment: Theory and Practice, Springer International Publishing AG, Cham, Switzerland, 2018. ISBN: 978-3-319-56475-3.

Google Scholar

[3] A. Laurent, C. Molin, M. Owsianiak, P. Fantke, W. Dewulf, C. Herrmann, S. Kara, M. Z. Hauschild, "The role of life cycle engineering (LCE) in meeting the sustainable development goals – report from a consultation of LCE experts", Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 230, 2019, p.378–382

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.129

Google Scholar

[4] "Sustainable development – EUR-Lex glossary", European Union, available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/glossary/sustainable-development.html (accessed 2025).

Google Scholar

[5] K. Branker, J. Jeswiet, I. Y. Kim, "Greenhouse gases emitted in manufacturing a product — A new economic model", CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, vol. 60, no. 1, 2011, p.53–56

DOI: 10.1016/j.cirp.2011.03.002

Google Scholar

[6] M. Z. Hauschild, J. Jeswiet, L. Alting, "From Life Cycle Assessment to Sustainable Production: Status and Perspectives", CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, vol. 54, no. 2, 2005, p.1–21

DOI: 10.1016/S0007-8506(07)60017-1

Google Scholar

[7] M. Hauschild, L. C. Dreyer, A. Jørgensen, "Assessing social impacts in a life cycle perspective—Lessons learned", CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, vol. 57, 2008, p.21–24

DOI: 10.1016/j.cirp.2008.03.002

Google Scholar

[8] J. R. Chou, "An ARIZ-based life cycle engineering model for eco-design", Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 39, 2013

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.037

Google Scholar

[9] F. Borda, G. Ambrogio, L. Filice, F. Gagliardi, Integrated Costs and Environmental Impacts Optimization for Production of a Multi-Material Component, Procedia CIRP, vol. 122, 2024, p.587–592

DOI: 10.1016/j.procir.2024.02.017

Google Scholar

[10] G. Serratore, F. Borda, V. Basile, L. Filice, Life cycle assessment-guided design for sustainable microinjection molds, 2025, p.1807–1816

DOI: 10.21741/9781644903599-194

Google Scholar

[11] F. Borda, V. Basile, F. Gagliardi, L. Filice, "Life Cycle Costing of new generation of molds for microinjection molding process", International Conference on Industry of the Future and Smart Manufacturing 2025.

DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2026.02.182

Google Scholar

[12] G. Zaniboni, R. Pelaccia, L. Orazi, R. Surace, G. Rotella, V. Basile, Resin molds to improve thermal energy consumption in injection molding process, 2025, p.393–400

DOI: 10.21741/9781644903735-46

Google Scholar

[13] F. Borda, A.D. La Rosa, L. Filice, F. Gagliardi, Environmental comparison of opposing manufacturing strategies at changing of energy sources, EoL approaches and shape peculiarity for an automotive component, 2024, p.1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/2374068X.2024. 2432724

DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.4651555

Google Scholar

[14] M.F. Ashby, Materials Selection in Mechanical Design, 5th ed., Butterworth-Heinemann, 2016. ISBN: 978-1-85617-608-8.

Google Scholar

[15] Formaldehyde Resin as a Solid Fuel and Activated Carbon. (2024). Hungarian Journal of Industry and Chemistry, 52(1), 71-77

DOI: 10.33927/hjic-2024-09

Google Scholar

[16] A.R. McLauchlin, O. R. Ghita, L. Savage, Studies on the reprocessability of poly-ether-ether-ketone (PEEK), Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 214, no. 1, 2014, p.75–80

DOI: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2013.07.010

Google Scholar

[17] Borda, F., La Rosa, A.D., Filice, L. et al. Environmental impact of process constrained topology optimization design on automotive component' life. Int J Mater Form 16, 48 (2023)

DOI: 10.1007/s12289-023-01771-2

Google Scholar

[18] Saaty, T.L. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1, 83–98 (2008)

DOI: 10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590

Google Scholar

[19] Guinée, J.B., Heijungs, R., Huppes, G. et al. Life cycle assessment: past, present, and future. Environ Sci Technol 45, 90–96 (2011)

DOI: 10.1021/es101316v

Google Scholar