Desktop three-dimensional (3D) printers are used in businesses, schools, and colleges, and are generally of an unenclosed design which may give rise to injuries or inhalation exposure to emissions of small particles (<1 µm) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The aim of this work was to explore the health risks related to the use of desktop 3D printers in workplaces in the United Kingdom. A digital survey on the use of desktop 3D printers was completed voluntarily and anonymously between February and June 2023, receiving 146 responses. The most common technology and material used for printing were "filament deposition" and "polylactic acid," respectively. The median number of printers an organisation had in use in one room was 2. A median of 10 people could be in the room during printer operation. A range of finishing techniques were reportedly applied to the printed object including the use of hand tools and solvents. General room ventilation was the most common exposure control measure stated. Measurements of airborne particles and VOCs were taken at 2 sites: a university and an engineering workshop. Airborne particle number concentrations (<1 µm) did not significantly increase above background levels when the printers were operating at either site. At the university, where there was the largest number of printers in operation, some VOCs could be attributed to the printing process; however, concentrations remained low. Evidence of associated respiratory symptoms was gathered by asking volunteers at the 2 sites visited to complete a questionnaire. Seventeen volunteers across the 2 sites completed the survey. None stated that they had ever experienced acute symptoms from working with 3D printers. However, they did report symptoms which included tiredness, dry/cracked skin, headache, itchy/runny nose, and a cough, with some stating that these improved on their days off. Overall, limited evidence from published literature and this study suggests that exposure to desktop 3D printing emissions could be associated with short-term respiratory health symptoms. However, static measurements in 2 workplaces where multiple desktop 3D printers were in use did not show airborne particle number concentrations in the room rising above background levels and concentrations of measured VOCs were all low. These findings may be due to effective ventilation and other control measures which over half of the workplaces surveyed stated that they had in place.
Keywords: 3D printing; controls; emissions; exposure; health; particles; respiratory; ventilation; volatile organic compounds; workers.
© Crown copyright 2024.