Siddharth Chebolu

Comparative analysis of additive manufacturing versus regular manufacturing processes considering economic, environmental, and quality-based perspectives

Started Nov. 7, 2024

Abstract or project description

This paper compares additive manufacturing (3D printing) with traditional manufacturing through economic, environmental, and quality-based perspectives. Using published research and a self-conducted experiment, it evaluates how each method performs depending on product type and production scale. While 3D printing offers strong advantages in customization, reduced waste, and low-cost small-scale production, it currently struggles with durability and high equipment costs compared to mass manufacturing. As an addition to the sources, three objects were produced using both 3D printing and traditional materials. The objects were a screw, a chess pawn, and a headphone stand. Each was analyzed for cost, production time, sustainability, and quality. Results showed that screws are best made traditionally due to strength requirements, pawns are viable with any method, and headphone stands strongly favor 3D printing. Overall, the findings support that additive manufacturing should not replace but rather complement traditional processes, doing well in scenarios that demand flexibility, creativity, and low-volume production. (The paper is a combination of evaluating existing research as well as individual data collection)