Case: How much can you reduce waste by changing to a fully digital process?
Imagine a world where manufacturing no longer contributes to the mountains of waste filling our landfills. A world where the products we create are not only optimized for comfort and performance but also for sustainability. Today, we’re closer to that future than ever before.
According to the World Bank, global waste generation is projected to increase by 70% by 2050 unless we take decisive action. This rising tide of waste threatens ecosystems, communities, and the well-being of future generations. But what if we could turn the tide, starting with something as essential—and seemingly simple—as a molded wheelchair seat?
This article explores how shifting from traditional foam to 3D-printed Programmable FoamⓇ can significantly reduce waste. We highlight a real-world example from our Rehacare 2024 installation to demonstrate this transformative potential. This change aligns with the global mission outlined in SDG target 12.5: to substantially reduce waste generation by 2030.
How much waste can we eliminate by switching base materials from traditional foam to 3D-printed Programmable FoamⓇ? And how do these methods stack up against the four critical targets for waste reduction?
- Prevention: Avoiding waste through efficient material use and eliminating unnecessary processes or packaging.
- Reduction: Minimizing waste during production, including improving precision, using fewer materials, and extending product life cycles.
- Recycling involves collecting and repurposing materials, such as scrap foam or plastic, to transform them into new products.
- Reuse: Reutilizing materials or components multiple times before disposal, including repurposing offcuts or designing products for disassembly and reuse.
Production methods
Before we dive deeper, let’s examine the differences between subtractive and additive manufacturing.
Subtractive manufacturing of molded wheelchair seats: In traditional foam manufacturing, large foam blocks are cut and shaped to meet specific ergonomic needs. Different types of foam are bonded together to create harder and softer zones, enhancing comfort and support. However, this subtractive process often results in significant waste—up to 50% of the original material—because offcuts and trimmings cannot easily be reused, especially in medical settings where hygiene is crucial. This waste is discarded, contributing to production inefficiencies and environmental impact.
In contrast, additive manufacturing relies on digital preparation. During this stage, the harder and softer zones are integrated into the 3D model, printed entirely in Thermoplastic Polyurethane (TPU) material. In the 3D printing process, the heated filament is extruded onto a heated bed, guided by advanced g-code generated in the build preparation software. Larger molded seats are printed in two pieces, while smaller ones can be printed in one piece, depending on the orthopedic technician’s preference. They can bond the two pieces or leave them together by the cover. This additive process minimizes waste to nearly zero, as material is used only where needed.
By switching to digital production, we can eliminate waste from producing molded wheelchair seats—this is a strong message. So, the question is, can we visualize it?
The Rehacare installation - the picture tells the story
The accompanying image illustrates the contrast between the two manufacturing methods. We have two versions of the same wheelchair seat. While the traditional foam seat may appear larger, it still has some excess foam to be removed after CNC molding, which occurs when fitting the seat into the wheelchair. In contrast, the 3D-printed seat is ready for use straight from the printer.
We collected the waste from the traditional foam seat in a large bag, which we poured into the display, visually highlighting the significant waste generated. For the 3D-printed Programmable FoamⓇ seat, however, the only waste was a small string of filament.
This installation powerfully demonstrated the stark differences between the two manufacturing processes and was an eye-opener for many visitors. It clearly illustrated the potential for waste elimination. With a single base material, recycling and reuse become significantly more straightforward. While we still have some ground to cover before fully achieving sustainability, the enthusiastic response we received reassures us that this is the future of wheelchair seating technology.
Comparison of production methods against waste management strategies
Conclusion
Examining the transition from traditional foam manufacturing to 3D-printed Programmable FoamⓇ, we see a powerful example of how digital processes can almost eliminate waste in foam production.
Focusing on the four pillars of waste management—prevention, reduction, recycling, and reuse—can address the pressing issue of waste generation. The switch to additive manufacturing allows us to raise the design complexity and craft in one go, minimizing waste and ensuring that materials are used efficiently. This approach aligns seamlessly with the SDG target 12.5 goals of substantially reducing waste generation by 2030, and why wait? We can break the curve now.
While the journey toward a fully sustainable manufacturing process is ongoing, the positive feedback we received underscores a shared vision for a cleaner, more responsible future in wheelchair seating aids. Embracing innovative solutions like 3D printing helps our customers reach environmental goals and paves the way for a new era of product design—one that prioritizes sustainability, efficiency, and improved user experience. So yes, committing to these changes can reduce waste and contribute to a healthier planet for future generations, and you just need to reach out to get started.
