INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Cradle-To-Gate Environmental Impact Assessment of EDM Wire-  
Cut and Laser Cutting Processes  
Umi Hayati Ahmad*., Mohamad Alif Mohamad Hadzir., Nurul Ain Maidin., Mohd Hadzley Abu Bakar  
Fakulti Teknologi dan Kejuruteraan Industri dan Pembuatan, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka,  
Hang Tuah Jaya, 76100 Durian Tunggal, Melaka, Malaysia  
*Corresponding Author  
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91100388  
Received: 27 November 2025; Accepted: 04 December 2025; Published: 11 December 2025  
ABSTRACT  
Non-traditional machining (NTM) processes, such as EDM wire-cut and laser cutting, are widely used in  
manufacturing for their ability to machine complex geometries and hard-to-cut materials. Despite their  
operational advantages, the environmental implications of these processes remain insufficiently understood. This  
study develops a structured cradle-to-gate environmental assessment framework to enable a systematic and  
reproducible comparison between EDM wire-cut and laser cutting for the production of an identical wrench  
component from mild steel. The framework is organised into sequential stages, including process selection,  
functional unit and system boundary definition, inventory data collection, and impact modelling using GaBi  
software. Key impact categories considered include Climate Change, Metal Depletion, Human Toxicity  
(Cancer), Ionising Radiation, and Freshwater Eutrophication. Results indicate that EDM wire-cut environmental  
impacts are primarily driven by electricity consumption and wire usage, whereas laser cutting impacts are  
dominated by high power demand and assist-gas consumption. The study highlights critical process parameters  
affecting environmental performance and identifies opportunities for impact reduction through optimized  
machine settings and resource usage. The novelty of this work lies in the introduction of a structured LCA  
framework tailored specifically for non-traditional machining, providing clear comparative evidence to support  
more informed and sustainable process selection. These findings offer practical guidance for manufacturers  
aiming to reduce environmental footprints while maintaining production efficiency.  
Keywords: Environmental, Impact, Non-Traditional, Wirecut, Laser  
INTRODUCTION  
Non-traditional machining (NTM) processes, such as electrical discharge machining (EDM) Wirecut and laser  
cutting, have increasingly become central to advanced manufacturing. Unlike conventional cutting tools that rely  
primarily on mechanical force, NTM methods remove material in controlled micro-increments, enabling the  
production of intricate geometries that are otherwise difficult to achieve. This capability to produce highly  
precise and detailed features has led to their widespread adoption across industrial sectors requiring complex  
component designs and tight tolerances (Ravasio, Maccarini, & Pellegrini, 2021; Qudeiri et al., 2020). As  
manufacturing demands evolve, understanding the broader implications of selecting an appropriate NTM  
method—particularly regarding environmental performance—has become increasingly important (Atif et al.,  
2024; Liu et al., 2024).  
Among the NTM techniques currently employed, including laser cutting, ultrasonic machining, abrasive water  
jet, EDM Wirecut, and EDM die sinking, EDM Wirecut and laser cutting are two of the most widely utilized due  
to their reliability and precision (He et al., 2022; González‑Rojas, Miranda‑Valenzuela, & Calderón‑Najera,  
2024). While both aim to achieve accurate cuts, they differ fundamentally in cutting mechanism, energy  
requirements, and auxiliary systems. EDM Wirecut relies on a series of rapid electrical discharges and the use  
of dielectric fluid, which must be monitored and disposed of responsibly, whereas laser cutting employs  
concentrated light energy and requires cooling units such as chillers or blowers (Oliveira et al., 2011; O’Neill et  
Page 4919  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
al., 2024). These differences inherently affect the environmental footprint of each process (Salem, Hegab, &  
Kishawy, 2023; Ishfaq et al., 2023).  
Sustainability is now a defining concern in manufacturing, driven by the need to reduce energy consumption,  
minimize waste, and adopt cleaner production strategies (Hannan et al., 2024; Liu et al., 2023). In this context,  
environmental factors such as electricity usage, heat generation, waste by-products, and overall process  
efficiency play a crucial role in determining a machining method’s ecological impact (Zheng et al., 2022; He et  
al., 2022). EDM Wirecut, while capable of producing intricate features, often involves longer machining times  
and higher energy use associated with continuous electrical discharge, as well as environmental burdens from  
dielectric fluid handling (Gamage, DeSilva, Harrison, & Harrison, 2025; González‑Rojas et al., 2024). In  
comparison, laser cutting is typically faster, yet its energy consumption is influenced by machine configuration,  
beam power, and cooling requirements (Oliveira et al., 2011; O’Neill et al., 2024).  
These distinctions suggest that evaluating environmental performance requires more than assessing cutting  
efficiency alone; it also depends on machine architecture, process parameters, and the nature of auxiliary  
materials (Atif et al., 2024; Salem et al., 2023). Existing literature often emphasizes technical outcomes such as  
dimensional accuracy, surface finish, and machining capability, while giving less attention to sustainability  
metrics (Zhang et al., 2018; Ishfaq et al., 2023). Consequently, a structured comparison between EDM Wirecut  
and laser cutting, considering energy consumption, waste production, and auxiliary material use, is necessary to  
guide manufacturers toward more environmentally responsible decision-making (DeSilva & Gamage, 2016; Liu  
et al., 2024)  
METHODOLOGY  
The research objectives outlined in the previous section were addressed through a structured methodological  
approach designed to enable a systematic and comparable cradle-to-gate environmental assessment of EDM  
wire-cut and laser cutting processes. Both processes were evaluated based on the production of an identical  
wrench component fabricated from mild steel sheet. The methodology was organised into several sequential  
stages, including process selection, functional unit and system boundary definition, inventory data collection,  
and LCA modelling using the GaBi software. The overall methodological workflow is illustrated in the  
conceptual framework presented in the following figure.  
Figure 1: Conceptual framework of the cradle-to-gate environmental assessment of EDM wire-cut and laser  
cutting  
Material and Design Specification  
For this study, a 4 mm mild steel plate was selected as the workpiece material. This material was chosen because  
it is widely used in industrial applications and is compatible with both machining processes considered in this  
study. Awrench-shaped design, as in Figure 2, served as the test geometry. This design was selected as it provides  
both internal and external contour features, thereby offering a realistic and technically meaningful basis for  
comparison. To ensure consistency, the same CAD model was applied throughout all machining trials.  
Page 4920  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Figure 2: Autocad drawing for wrench  
Machine Selection  
Two machining systems were employed in this study. The first was a Laser Cutting machine, which removes  
material through localized melting and vaporisation produced by a focused laser beam. The second was a EDM  
Wirecut machine, where material is removed through controlled electrical discharges occurring between a thin  
wire electrode and the workpiece. These technologies were selected as they represent contrasting non-traditional  
machining approaches, thereby providing opportunities to examine environmental differences arising from  
fundamentally different cutting mechanisms.  
Parameter Configuration  
In order to conduct the experiments under controlled conditions, both machine-level and process-level  
parameters were identified and set in advance.  
Process parameters  
Table 1: Process parameter  
Machine  
Process Parameters  
Cutting Time  
Value  
Energy Consumption/ Waste  
EDM Wirecut  
EDM Wirecut  
Laser Cut  
39 min  
343.7058mm  
30s  
Electric  
-
Total Cutting  
Time Taken  
Electric  
Heat  
Laser Cut  
Gas pressure (O N,CO )  
2,  
0.05psi  
2
Machine parameters  
Table 2: Machine parameter for EDM Wirecut  
Machine Parameters  
Machine Fluid (water)  
Wire Die Diameter (Brass)  
Voltage  
Value  
20L  
Energy Consumption / Waste  
Water  
-
0.20mm  
8V  
Electric  
Page 4921  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Steel thickness  
Machine type  
Air pressure  
70mm  
-
Punch  
Electric  
0.5Mpa  
30L/min  
9.5mm/min  
-
Air consumption  
Cutting speed  
-
Electric  
Table 3: Machine parameter for Lasercut  
Machine Parameters  
Nozzle diameter  
Feed rate  
Value  
Energy Consumption / Waste  
1.20mm  
3600rpm  
2200Watt  
200Hz  
-
Electric  
Power  
Electric  
Frequency  
Nozzle gap  
Offset  
Electric  
0.7mm  
-
-
-
0.17mm  
7.5mm  
Lens  
Machining Experiments and Data Acquisition  
The machining experiments were performed under controlled laboratory conditions. The wrench geometry was  
produced separately using the laser cutter and the Wire-EDM machine. During each trial, data were collected  
systematically to capture both technical and environmental aspects of the processes.  
Environmental Impact Assessment Using GaBi  
The environmental implications of each machining process were assessed using the GaBi Life Cycle Assessment  
software. The experimentally obtained data were converted into input flows representing electricity usage,  
consumables, auxiliary materials, and waste generation. In line with common practice in LCA studies, a cradle-  
to-gate boundary was adopted, focusing specifically on impacts associated with the machining stage. GaBi-  
generated graphs and numerical outputs were extracted and prepared for comparative analysis.  
RESULT AND DISCUSSION  
This section presents the environmental performance of EDM Wirecut and laser cutting processes based on life  
cycle assessment (LCA) data obtained from GaBi software. Five impact categories were considered: climate  
change, ionising radiation, metal depletion, human toxicity (cancer), and freshwater eutrophication. The  
contributions of both material consumption and electricity usage were evaluated to provide a comprehensive  
understanding of each process’s environmental footprint. The key results are summarized in Table 4, with further  
interpretation provided below.  
Page 4922  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Table 4: Environmental Impact Comparison – EDM Wirecut and Laser Cutting  
Impact Category  
Unit  
EDM  
Wirecut  
(Total)  
Laser  
Cutting  
(Total)  
Dominant  
Contributor  
(EDM)  
Dominant  
Contributor (Laser)  
Climate Change  
kg CO₂-eq  
11.36  
9.12  
Mild  
steel  
plate Mild steel plate (8.5)  
(10.3)  
Ionising Radiation  
Metal Depletion  
kg U-235-eq  
kg Fe-eq  
0.39  
5.98  
0.065  
4.15  
Electricity (0.337)  
Electricity (0.056)  
Mild  
steel  
plate Mild  
steel  
plate  
(5.97)  
(4.12)  
Human  
(Cancer)  
Toxicity CTUh  
1.34 × 10⁻⁸  
8.02 × 10⁻⁶  
0.82 × 10⁻⁸  
5.95 × 10⁻⁶  
Mild  
(1.27×10⁻⁸)  
steel  
plate Mild  
steel  
plate  
plate  
(0.80×10⁻⁸)  
Freshwater  
kg P-eq  
Mild  
steel  
plate Mild  
steel  
Eutrophication  
(6.3×10⁻⁶)  
(5.2×10⁻⁶)  
Climate Change (kg CO₂-eq)  
EDM Wirecut generated a total of 11.36 kg CO₂, with the majority (10.3 kg) stemming from the mild steel plate  
and 1.06 kg from electricity. Laser Cutting produced 9.12 kg CO₂, largely attributed to the steel plate (8.5 kg).  
These results indicate that material use is the primary contributor to carbon emissions, whereas electricity has a  
relatively minor influence. This suggests that optimizing material efficiency and minimizing scrap could  
substantially reduce the climate impact for both machining methods.  
Ionising Radiation (kg U-235-eq)  
In EDM Wirecut, 0.0528 kg U-235 originated from the steel plate, while 0.337 kg U-235 resulted from electricity  
consumption, 0.39kg U-235. Laser Cutting exhibited a considerably lower total of 0.065 kg U-235, also primarily  
influenced by electricity. This finding highlights that the source and amount of electrical energy are critical  
determinants of ionising radiation, emphasizing the potential environmental benefit of cleaner or renewable  
energy sources.  
Metal Depletion (kg Fe-eq)  
EDM Wirecut contributed 5.97 kg Fe from the steel plate and 0.0142 kg Fe from electricity, totalling 5.98 kg Fe,  
while Laser Cutting showed a lower total of 4.15 kg Fe, mainly due to the material itself. These results reaffirm  
that raw material consumption is the dominant factor in metal depletion, underscoring the importance of  
judicious material selection and minimizing unnecessary use.  
Human Toxicity (Cancer) (CTUh)  
The EDM Wirecut process resulted in 1.27 × 10⁻⁸ CTUh from the steel plate and 0.0723 × 10⁻⁸ CTUh from  
electricity, totalling 1.34 × 10⁻⁸ CTUh. Laser Cutting produced 0.82 × 10⁻⁸ CTUh, also predominantly influenced  
by material. This indicates that chemical exposure from material processing contributes more to potential human  
health risks than electricity use, though overall values remain low. Proper handling and disposal of machining  
fluids and dust can further mitigate these effects.  
Freshwater Eutrophication (kg P-eq)  
EDM Wirecut generated 6.3 × 10⁻⁶ kg P from the steel plate and 1.72 × 10⁻⁶ kg P from electricity, for a total of  
8.02 × 10⁻⁶ kg P, while Laser Cutting produced 5.95 × 10⁻⁶ kg P. These results demonstrate that both processes  
contribute to water contamination, with material handling remaining the dominant contributor.  
Page 4923  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Comparative Analysis of Environmental Impacts  
Table 5: Comparative Analysis of Environmental Impacts: EDM Wirecut vs. Laser Cutting  
Environmental Impact EDM  
EDM  
EDM  
Laser  
Laser  
– Cutting  
Laser  
– Cutting  
Total  
Category  
Wirecut – Wirecut – Wirecut – Cutting  
–
Material  
Electricity  
Total  
Material  
Electricity  
10.30  
1.06  
11.36  
10.15  
1.50  
11.65  
Climate Change (CO₂,  
kg)  
0.0528  
0.337  
0.390  
0.010  
0.120  
0.130  
Ionising Radiation (kg  
U235)  
5.97  
1.27  
0.0142  
0.0723  
5.98  
1.34  
5.90  
1.10  
0.020  
0.065  
5.92  
1.17  
Metal Depletion (kg Fe)  
Human  
Toxicity  
–
Cancer (CTUh ×10⁻⁸)  
6.3×10⁻⁶  
1.72×10⁻⁶  
8.02×10⁻⁶  
5.8×10⁻⁶  
1.80×10⁻⁶  
7.60×10⁻⁶  
Freshwater  
Eutrophication (kg P)  
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) results indicate that EDM Wirecut generally exhibits higher environmental  
impacts than Laser Cutting across multiple categories, including climate change, metal depletion, human  
toxicity, freshwater eutrophication, and ionising radiation. In both processes, material consumption emerges as  
the dominant contributor, while electricity consumption is particularly significant for ionising radiation. These  
findings highlight that the environmental footprint of non-traditional machining depends not only on the chosen  
method but also on the efficiency of material use and energy consumption (DeSilva & Gamage, 2016; Gamage,  
DeSilva, Harrison, & Harrison, 2025; Atif et al., 2024; González‑Rojas, Miranda‑Valenzuela, &  
Calderón‑Najera, 2024).  
For EDM Wirecut, the machining of a mild steel sheet (4 mm thickness) to produce a wrench design contributed  
significantly to CO₂ emissions. Specifically, the steel material alone accounted for 10.3 kg CO₂, while electricity  
consumption added only 1.06 kg, giving a total of 11.36 kg CO₂. This demonstrates that, although continuous  
electrical energy is required, the embodied emissions from raw material dominate the climate change potential  
of EDM operations. In terms of ionising radiation, electricity contributed more substantially (0.337 kg U235)  
than material machining (0.0528 kg U235), indicating that energy sources can disproportionately influence  
certain environmental categories (He et al., 2022). Metal depletion was almost entirely driven by steel usage  
(5.97 kg Fe), with negligible contribution from electricity (0.0142 kg Fe), reflecting the material-intensive nature  
of EDM Wirecut processes (Qudeiri et al., 2020). Human toxicity potential was slightly higher for the material  
component (1.27 × 10⁻⁸ CTUh) than for electricity (0.0723 × 10⁻⁸ CTUh), suggesting that chemical emissions  
from the machining process have a greater effect on human health than energy consumption (Ishfaq et al., 2023).  
Freshwater eutrophication followed a similar trend, with steel machining contributing 6.3 × 10⁻⁶ kg P and  
electricity 1.72 × 10⁻⁶ kg P (Salem, Hegab, & Kishawy, 2023).  
In contrast, preliminary data for Laser Cutting show a different environmental profile. The high-intensity beam  
melts or vaporizes material rapidly, generally reducing direct machining time and energy consumption (Oliveira  
et al., 2011; O’Neill et al., 2024). However, energy-intensive auxiliary systems, such as chillers and blowers, can  
significantly increase electricity-related impacts. CO₂ emissions from material usage remain dominant, similar  
to EDM Wirecut, but energy-related contributions are proportionally higher due to the power demand of laser  
systems (He et al., 2022). The potential for ionising radiation is comparatively lower, as the process does not  
involve continuous electrical discharges, though fine particle emissions and other occupational hazards may be  
elevated (O’Neill et al., 2024). Metal depletion remains closely tied to raw material, while human toxicity is  
slightly reduced compared to EDM, due to minimal chemical fluid involvement (Hannan et al., 2024).  
Freshwater eutrophication is also lower, reflecting the absence of dielectric fluids (Atif et al., 2024).  
Page 4924  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
The integrated LCA results reveal several critical insights. First, material efficiency is central to reducing  
environmental burdens: minimizing raw material use, optimizing component design, and reducing scrap can  
markedly lower climate change potential, metal depletion, human toxicity, and freshwater eutrophication (Liu et  
al., 2024; Hannan et al., 2024). Second, electricity consumption strongly affects ionising radiation and, to a lesser  
extent, other environmental categories, suggesting that the adoption of renewable or cleaner energy sources can  
meaningfully mitigate electricity-related impacts, particularly for EDM operations (Zheng et al., 2022). Third,  
auxiliary systems and process fluids play an essential role in shaping the overall environmental profile,  
emphasizing that sustainability cannot be evaluated solely based on the cutting mechanism (Ishfaq et al., 2023;  
Salem, Hegab, & Kishawy, 2023).  
Overall, EDM Wirecut is more material- and chemically intensive, while Laser Cutting reduces some chemical  
impacts but may incur higher electricity-related contributions depending on auxiliary system configuration.  
These observations suggest that a holistic strategy—optimizing material efficiency, improving energy use, and  
implementing effective waste and fluid management—is necessary to minimize environmental impacts across  
non-traditional machining technologies (Atif et al., 2024; Ishfaq et al., 2023). Future studies could expand the  
scope to include alternative materials, additional machining methods, and full cradle-to-grave assessments to  
strengthen sustainable manufacturing practices (Liu et al., 2023; He et al., 2022).  
ACKNOWLEDGMENT  
The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka (UTeM) and  
Fakulti Teknologi dan Kejuruteraan Industri dan Pembuatan (FTKIP) for providing the facilities, resources, and  
support necessary to carry out this research.  
REFERENCE  
1. Atif, M., et al. (2024). Development of a framework for sustainability assessment of magnesium alloy  
machining  
processes.  
Journal  
of  
Sustainable  
Manufacturing.  
https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2023.2287478  
2. DeSilva, A.ꢀK.ꢀM., & Gamage, J.ꢀR. (2016). Effect of wire breakage on the process energy utilisation of  
EDM. Procedia CIRP, 42, 586–590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.02.264  
3. Gamage, J.ꢀR., DeSilva, A.ꢀK.ꢀM., Harrison, C.ꢀS., & Harrison, D.ꢀK. (2025). Process level environmental  
performance of electrodischarge machining of aluminium (3003) and steel (AISI P20) [Preprint]. GCU  
Research  
Online.  
https://researchonline.gcu.ac.uk/ws/files/24213053/DeSilva  
JRG_Process_level_environmental_performance_of_EDM_R2.pdf  
4. González‑Rojas, H.ꢀO., Miranda‑Valenzuela, J.ꢀC., & Calderón‑Najera, J.ꢀd.ꢀD. (2024). Optimization of  
cutting parameters for energy efficiency in wire electrical discharge machining of AISI D2 steel. Applied  
Sciences, 14(11), 4701. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14114701  
5. Hannan, A., Mehmood, S., Ali, M.ꢀAsad, Raza, M.ꢀH., Farooq, M.ꢀU., Anwar, S., & Adediran, A.ꢀA.  
(2024). Machining performance, economic and environmental analyses and multi‑criteria optimization  
of  
electric  
discharge  
machining  
for  
SS310  
alloy.  
Scientific  
Reports,  
14,  
28930.  
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-79338-7  
6. He, Y., Xie, H., Ge, Y., Lin, Y., Yao, Z., Wang, B., … Sun, Y. (2022). Laser cutting technologies and  
corresponding pollution control strategy. Processes, 10(4), 732. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10040732  
7. Ishfaq, K., Sana, M., Rehman, M., Alfaify, A.ꢀY., & Zia, A.ꢀW. (2023). Role of biodegradable dielectrics  
toward tool wear and dimensional accuracy in Cu‑mixed die sinking EDM of Inconel 600 for sustainable  
machining. Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering, 45, 235.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-023-04126-9  
8. Liu, Y., Ouyang, P., Zhang, Z., Zhu, H., Chen, X., Wang, Y., Li, B., Xu, K., Wang, J., & Lu, J. (2024).  
Developments, challenges and future trends in advanced sustainable machining technologies for  
preparing array micro-holes. Nanoscale, 16(43), 19938–19969. https://doi.org/10.1039/D4NR02910K  
9. Liu, Z., et al. (2023). LCA‑based environmental sustainability assessment of hybrid additive‑subtractive  
processes: (HAM vs CNC milling) — turbine blade case study. Advances in Industrial and Manufacturing  
Engineering, 6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aime.2023.100117  
Page 4925  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
10. Oliveira, M., Santos, J.ꢀP., Almeida, F.ꢀG., Reis, A., Pereira, J.ꢀP.ꢀG.ꢀT., & Barata da Rocha, A. (2011).  
Impact of laser‑based technologies in the energy‑consumption of metal cutters: Comparison between  
commercially  
available  
systems.  
Key  
Engineering  
Materials,  
473,  
809–815.  
https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.473.809  
11. O’Neill, K., et al. (2024). Respirable particles and gas contaminants emissions in laser‑cutting processes.  
Atmospheric Air Quality Research. https://doi.org/10.4209/aaqr.24-02-oa-0032  
12. Qudeiri, J.ꢀE.ꢀA., Zaiout, A., Mourad, A.-H.ꢀI., Abidi, M.ꢀH., & Elkaseer, A. (2020). Principles and  
characteristics of different EDM processes in machining tool and die steels. Applied Sciences, 10(6),  
2082. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10062082  
13. Ravasio, C., Maccarini, G., & Pellegrini, G.ꢀI. (2021). Micro‑EDM process sustainability aspects.  
Università degli Studi di Bergamo. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10446/181086  
14. Salem, A., Hegab, H., & Kishawy, H.ꢀA. (2023). Environmental assessment and optimization when  
machining with micro‑textured cutting tools. In H. Kohl, G. Seliger, & F. Dietrich (Eds.), Manufacturing  
Driving Circular Economy (Ch. 41, pp. xxx‑xxx). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28839-  
5_41  
15. Zhang, Z., Yu, H., Zhang, Y., Yang, K., Li, W., Chen, Z., & Zhang, G. (2018). Analysis and optimization  
of process energy consumption and environmental impact in electrical discharge machining of titanium  
superalloys. Journal of Cleaner Production, 188, 667–676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.053  
16. Zheng, J., et al. (2022). Energy and CO₂ emissions modeling for unconventional WEDM process. Science  
of the Total Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.166201  
Page 4926  
www.rsisinternational.org