Can the use of recycled powders reduce AM spare parts costs?

Abstract

Additive Manufacturing (AM) has attracted growing interest for spare parts production, yet its industrial adoption remains limited. A key barrier is cost, particularly the high cost of raw materials. Prior research suggests that replacing virgin powders with recycled powders could significantly reduce material costs. Recycled powders also offer environmental benefits which, under carbon reduction policies, may translate into additional economic savings. However, these advantages are offset by drawbacks: recycled powders typically exhibit lower quality, leading to reduced part reliability and higher spare parts management costs. This trade-off raises a critical question: does the use of recycled powders reduce AM spare parts costs, as suggested by the literature? Through analytical and numerical analyses supported by a case study, we show that this is only conditionally true. While recycled powders can lower total costs, their economic viability depends on the balance between material cost savings, reliability degradation, and carbon pricing. We identify threshold regions that distinguish scenarios in which recycled powders are always, never, or only conditionally preferable. Results indicate that the threshold regions are up to twice as sensitive to changes in reliability as to changes in material cost, while carbon pricing and emission reductions have only a marginal effect.