
New Study Details Toxic Particles Spewed by 3D Printers - elijahparker
https://gizmodo.com/new-study-details-all-the-toxic-shit-spewed-out-by-3d-p-1830379464
======
deng
Anyone with a working nose cannot be really surprised about that, especially
w.r.t. ABS printing. There's a reason why things that burn/melt things usually
have an exhaust of some kind. I'm sure those will become mandatory at some
time, and rightfully so. Just like thermal runaway protection should be
mandatory, and yet many cheap 3D printers don't have it either. That should
actually worry people more than nano particles. I'm still amazed how many
people let their printers run while no one is at home (yes, there's
OctoPrint+Webcam, but last I checked that couldn't put out a fire...).

~~~
octorian
> I'm still amazed how many people let their printers run while no one is at
> home

When it takes 12-24 hours (or perhaps more) to complete a larger print, are
you really going to sit around and watch the thing? No, you're going to go
about your life until its finished. That means sleeping, going to work, etc.

~~~
cassianoleal
I have done 3-day long prints and have seen reports of 21+ days for a single
print.

This all from hobbyists who have full-time jobs. It would be impossible to sit
next to the printer for the entire print time for any big/complex enough
print.

~~~
solarkraft
The argument is not about it being practically possible, but whether you
should.

Though I also disagree with that.

------
8fingerlouie
Personally i never leave my printers "unattended", as in i'm at home, but i
don't watch them constantly when they're printing. They're in a room that is
normally closed when they're running, and is properly ventilated to the
outside after. ABS is printed in the garage.

I made a "better than nothing" auto off switch using an Arduino, a 230V relay,
a couple of MQ2 smoke detectors, and a couple of DS18B20 digital thermometers.

The MQ-2 is mounted about 50cm above my printers frame, one for each printer,
connected to an arduino which has a relay controlling power to the printers.
If smoke is detected, or the temperature rises above 45C, it cuts the power to
all printers. The arduino defaults to off, requiring manual intervention to
turn it on again via a push button. If the arduino loses power, so does the
printers.

It probably won't prevent the house from burning down, but in case of an
electrical fire it should shut that down pretty good. The problem is the
filament itself. It burns like a candle, so if the flames ever make it to the
filament, it should have no problems continuing to the spool, setting the
house ablaze.

~~~
crispyambulance

        > The problem is the filament itself. It burns like a candle...
    

I wonder if this can be addressed by keeping a slight positive pressure of
nitrogen or CO2 in the enclosure of the 3D printer?

~~~
nine_k
Filling your room with CO2 by accident won't be great either. That is, proper
ventilation would be needed anyway.

~~~
AWildC182
Could do a really low volume flow of nitrogen or argon at the extruder like in
welding. You'd still want some ventilation but you'd just need a tank,
regulator, and tubing instead of a sealed enclosure and you'd probably use
less gas. Just enough to prevent anything at the tip from burning.

~~~
nine_k
Yes, ventilation here is more like a fan in a room window than a sealed box
and tubes.

------
Hextinium
As someone who has a 3d printer running about a quarter of the time less than
10 feet away from me hearing that it could be bad for me is alarming that it
could be harming me. (Other than the lost sleep because its loud) When though
of as a risk benefit analysis though I come to the strong conclusion that I
will use my printer no matter what because it is the compiler to my hobby: no
printer, much harder time making stuff.

I don't need to iterate on the greatness of them here but they have the
potential to radically help teach people how to make stuff which drastically
helps in industry.

My main concern with these articles is that there is no relative risk factor
presented against. I have no idea if these particulates are something it would
be worthy to invest in an enclosure or are there low levels which are
permittable.

I know that I personally am much more likely to have health complications from
almost anything else but to someone else reading the above article they may
draw the conclusion that 3d could be dangerous and should be restricted. If a
person shows up to a school board meeting throwing a fit that they are running
3d printers with children in the same room then it looks bad on the printers,
possibly having them removed and to generalize I think that that is the last
thing anyone wants.

Ninja edit: formating

~~~
tinus_hn
You could of course try for some adequate ventilation and an enclosure instead
of just ignoring the issue.

~~~
sharpneli
This. It's not a big deal. Soldering also produces harmful fumes and as long
as you ventilate properly it's not a big deal.

Just do an image search for "solder ventilation" for ideas on how to do it.

Regardless of this I kinda do understand the motivation to ignore the issue.
People are afraid that there will be a panic and it's going to be banned.

~~~
ekr
And some people (including myself) actually enjoy the smell of molten rosin
flux.

~~~
flavor8
And some people enjoy tobacco. That doesn't mean it's smart to continue
breathing it in.

------
netgusto
Some figures about the UFP emitted by FDM:

[https://box3d.eu/3d-printing-safety-pollution-
health/](https://box3d.eu/3d-printing-safety-pollution-health/)

From this one data point, it seems that ABS is the big emitter.

~~~
Mashimo
Here is another one [1] taken from [2]

Though that is just one graph out of many. With modern PLA getting better and
better, it's rare people use ABS. Makes me wonder how harmful PLA is.

I want to add an HEPA filter anyway.

[1]
[https://www.tandfonline.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/t...](https://www.tandfonline.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/tandf/journals/content/uast20/2017/uast20.v051.i11/02786826.2017.1342029/20180430/images/large/uast_a_1342029_f0006_oc.jpeg)
[2]
[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02786826.2017.1...](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02786826.2017.1342029)

~~~
steve19
PLAs lower melting point is the issue. I only print PLA, mainly because it's
less toxic, but I dare not print a part that might end up in a hot car, near a
heating source or outside.

~~~
torbjorn
I am shocked by how many people use 3d printed parts in the kitchen, printed
PLA is not a food safe matieral.

And if you print a toy for your kids it's gonna end up in their mouth at some
point...

~~~
mdorazio
See here [1]. No FDM printed item is going to be food safe because the layered
properties allow the accumulation of bacteria, but PLA is generally non-toxic
and will only leach a few "safe in small quantities" chemicals into things it
comes in contact with.

[1]
[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/02786915940...](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/027869159400145E)

~~~
flybrand
Could they mean that the material is suitable per 21CFR, but as you state, it
would not meet the cleaning requirements. Benign material that could be single
use, but a user should not be expected to be able to maintain a clean surface?

~~~
mdorazio
I think that's it. Ok for single use or for things that will only come in
contact with food that will be cooked (like cookie cutters). Not ok for
plates, cups, spatulas, etc. unless you seal them post-print with a food safe
coating. I've seen people print both categories of things, though...

As for toys, I don't see a big problem. Even if you eat PLA it won't really do
much harm. It's safer than the ABS most toys are made from.

------
rambojazz
This is hardly surprising though, and it was inevitable that studies started
to emerge.

------
flybrand
I wrote a blog post about one of the earlier studies in 2013 [see below].

HEPA filters can still be effective - the study doesn't talk about the charge
of the UFPs - and the 0.3 micron DoP particles used in HEPA testing are
designed to be uncharged. It is common designing filter media to use charged
media to attract small particles.

If you were running a 3D printer and concerned about this risk, I would
suggest: 1/ Encapsulate the unit. 2/ Wear a mask when the enclosure is open.
3/ Ensure a steady flow of process air when running to prevent accumulation.
You could also run at a negative pressure to keep USPs in the enclosure. 4/
Have a filter bank on the air outlet that you change out regularly. Pair a
HEPA element with a highly charged media.

Link to 2013 blog post: [https://fredlybrand.com/2013/10/19/filtration-in-the-
popular...](https://fredlybrand.com/2013/10/19/filtration-in-the-popular-
media-ultrafine-particles-and-3d-printing/)

------
newnewpdro
Is anyone honestly surprised that melting plastic produces toxic
particulates/fumes? It should go without saying that one would want these
machines enclosed in a ventilated space separated from people.

~~~
ndnxhs
The most common filament used (PLA) is labeled as non toxic and is made of
mostly corn. So yes it would be surprising if that was found to be toxic.

~~~
tinus_hn
You know these labels on cigarettes that state the smoke contains at least 253
toxic chemicals? The smoke from other plants of course contains at least about
200 of the same chemicals.

~~~
goldenkey
People think the formaldehyde and all these other chemicals with spooky names
were added by the bad cigarette companies..but not so!! Whenever any
hydrocarbon is burned, a characteristic distribution of alkanes, alkenes, and
alkynes is formed -- with the nastiest and most "radical" chemicals (like the
alkynes), appearing with the lowest frequency.

That's why smoking has almost no risk unless repeated. With enough exposure,
those minimal alkynes add up. And they destroy DNA and wreak general havok due
to their bond energy.

I know I just reiterated your point. Thank you for making the point - smoke is
what is a probabilistic distribution of energetic hydrocarbons -- not the
plant!!

------
snarfy
Once I got my homemade printer working, the first thing I did was build a 100%
air sealed enclosure. Melted ABS stinks.

~~~
teraflop
I'd say "stinks" is a bit of an overstatement, unless you have a very
sensitive nose.

I've only tried printing with ABS a couple of times, but to me it smells
almost exactly like an old photocopier... kind of nostalgic.

~~~
bradfa
All the FDM printers I've been around when they print with ABS end up making
my eyes water and give me a headache if I stay near them for more than a
minute or two. Possibly the types of ABS used matters for this but I cannot
stand near an ABS printer without really noticing it affect me.

PLA has a definite smell but doesn't seem to affect me physically.

------
nine_k
So many man-designed processes produce nano-particles. What _natural_
processes produce them, too? I expect many would. How does nature cope with
this?

~~~
marcosdumay
Soil erosion.

A dry atmosphere is full of nano-particles (and yes they are harmful). But
natural particles tend to be larger and more benign than most human made ones.

Nature copes with them the same way it copes with ever other long term
problem: it affects individuals, and individuals are all dead at the long term
anyway.

~~~
flybrand
Many allergies are due to microparticles - which have individual features that
are in the nano realm.

------
bcaa7f3a8bbc
Isn't something like, a HEPA available in most home air filters, enough to
remove most particles?

~~~
Cthulhu_
Should be better than nothing in any case. A guideline mentioning that there
should be extraction and proper ventilation near 3D printers - just like in
laser printers, soldering stations, etc - would probably be wise.

~~~
Moru
Yes, let's not forget what laser printers used to spew out. Not sure if that
got any better with time?

------
amelius
How safe are the printed objects?

~~~
steve19
As safe as any other plastic object made from the same material.

~~~
brianwawok
Well for example - printed objects are generally not foodsafe. They are fine
to touch and whatnot, but they have too many little niches for food that I
would not 3d print myself a spoon..

------
newnewpdro
In case this feels like dejavu for the graybeards

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_Printer#Safety_hazards,_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_Printer#Safety_hazards,_health_risks,_and_precautions)

------
ccvannorman
TL;DR: "We were able to measure that there are _some_ toxic particles
emanated, but failed to produce any meaningful results about quantity of said
particles, or potential danger to consumers, in any way."

To me that says, the quantities they did measure were too low to publish for
this alarmist article.

From the article: >all tests indicated at least some level of toxic response
(though the toxic response varied by filament type). >The sheer variety of the
toxic substances produced by these printers was alarming. No less than 200
different volatile organic compounds (VOCs)

uh huh. The "sheer variety is alarming" line was about where my eyes started
to roll, finishing their 135° journey after confirming there are no meaningful
stats in this article.

~~~
Negative1
The corrolary of an alarmist report is a dismissive viewpoint. Theres evidence
here that FDM printers emit toxic fumes. If you want to believe it's really
not so bad, fine, close your made up mind. If there is a chance that filament
fumes are harmful, people need to be made aware. They're setting these things
up in grade school STEM/STEAM programs; there is potential for real harm here
and not pursuing more research is irresponsible.

~~~
hnmonkey
Agreed 100%. Them blowing this off because they don't feel like it has enough
data or teeth I think is a big mistake. There's a distinct possibility that
there will be a 3d printer in every classroom/office/home at some point in the
future (just like regular printers eventually graduated to be everywhere).
Discussing that there might actually be some toxic issues with these printers
now can head off a potential future where tons of people including children
are getting sick due to something that we didn't test enough or look at with
enough skepticism before it gained mass acceptance. It's win/win really...
they become safer if they are found to be emiting toxic fumes and people can
feel more comfortable having a safer 3d printer around them. I just don't see
the downside...

Much like how there are wall paints that have low or no VOCs I imagine we'd
want these printers to head in the same direction. Why would anyone say... oh
yeah these paints have a variety of VOCs they emit. Sounds alarmist and I
don't see enough evidence so we shouldn't explore further and come up with
ones that don't potentially harm people.

~~~
GistNoesis
I'm worried it will impact the cost of filament and printers. Unless there is
a cheap way to test and certify filaments. Volumes are still quite low.
Regulation risk concentrating filament production into monopolies. Then it
will be hard to trust that those certification anyway.

~~~
hnmonkey
Super valid concern. I imagine it will raise the price considerably and there
will be 'safe!' 3d printers that cost a ton because they've been certified and
have filaments and suction/vacuum/air pushing systems that have been tested
and show no ill effects towards humans. It seems inevitable, but I'd imagine
price will come down in a while as things scale.

It also does open the door for someone to come in and make a vent/hood system
that works for many types of 3d printers so I guess there's that...

