Research Papers

An Environmental and Cost Analysis of Stamping Sheet Metal Parts

[+] Author and Article Information
Daniel R. Cooper

Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, MA 02139
e-mail: drcooper@umich.edu

Kathleen E. Rossie, Timothy G. Gutowski

Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, MA 02139

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Manufacturing Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNALOF MANUFACTURING SCIENCEAND ENGINEERING. Manuscript received August 17, 2016; final manuscript received September 1, 2016; published online November 2, 2016. Editor: Y. Lawrence Yao.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 139(4), 041012 (Nov 02, 2016) (11 pages) Paper No: MANU-16-1450; doi: 10.1115/1.4034670 History: Received August 17, 2016; Revised September 01, 2016

Little work has been done on quantifying the environmental impacts and costs of sheet metal stamping. In this work, we present models that can be used to predict the energy requirements, global warming potential, human health impacts, and costs of making drawn parts using zinc (kirksite) die-sets and hydraulic or mechanical presses. The methodology presented can also be used to produce models of stamping using other die materials, such as iron, for which casting data already exists. An unprecedented study on the environmental impacts and costs of zinc die-set production was conducted at a leading Michigan die-maker. This analysis was used in conjunction with electrical energy measurements on forming presses to complete cradle-to-gate impact and cost analyses on producing small batch size hood and tailgate parts. These case studies were used to inform a generalized model that allows engineers to predict the impacts and costs of forming based on as little information as the final part material, surface area, thickness, and batch size (number of units produced). The case studies show that the press electricity is an insignificant contributor to the overall impacts and costs. The generalized models highlight that while costs for small batch production are dominated by the die-set, the environmental impacts are often dominated by the sheet metal. These findings explain the motivation behind the research into die-less forming processes such as incremental sheet forming, and emphasize the need to minimize the sheet metal scrap generation in order to reduce environmental impacts.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Zinc mass material flow. Mass of zinc (m kg) cast.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Collated annual data from the zinc die-making foundry

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Zinc machining power measurements (roughing: 19 kWh to remove 42.5 kg; finishing: 9.6 kWh to remove 2.5 kg)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Zinc die-making sensitivity analysis

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Power profile during forming of seven-parts on the hydraulic press (750 ton loading)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Power profile and die displacement for hydraulic press

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Power profile for forming of seven parts on the mechanical press

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Forming of one part using mechanical press

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Power profile for forming a part using a mechanical press. Loading of approximately 850 short ton.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

The ecological impacts (Ixx) and costs (Cxx) of forming sheet metal parts

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Stamped aluminum case study parts: (a) aluminum hood (hydraulic press) and (b) aluminum tailgate (mechanical press)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Environmental impacts from the hydraulic press (truck hood) case study: (a) CED, (b) GWP, and (c) human health impact

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Environmental impacts from the mechanical press (truck tailgate) case study: (a) CED, (b) GWP, and (c) human health impact

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Blank area versus die size. Error bars: ± 45% of mass.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Blank area versus die cost. Error bars: ±45% of cost.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

The CED and cost for stamping an aluminum part: 1.5 m2 surface area, 1.5 mm thick: (a) CED and (b) cost




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In