Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T04:13:20.476Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A METHODOLOGY TO SUPPORT COMPANIES IN THE FIRST STEPS TOWARDS DE-MANUFACTURING

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2021

Federica Cappelletti ,
Marta Rossi ,
Michele Germani  and
Mohammad Shadman Hanif
Federica Cappelletti
Affiliation:
Università Politecnica delle Marche
Marta Rossi*
Affiliation:
Università Politecnica delle Marche
Michele Germani
Affiliation:
Università Politecnica delle Marche
Mohammad Shadman Hanif
Affiliation:
Università Politecnica delle Marche
*
Rossi, Marta, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Department of Industrial Engineering and Mathematical Sciences, Italy, [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

De-manufacturing and re-manufacturing are fundamental technical solutions to efficiently recover value from post-use products. Disassembly in one of the most complex activities in de-manufacturing because i) the more manual it is the higher is its cost, ii) disassembly times are variable due to uncertainty of conditions of products reaching their EoL, and iii) because it is necessary to know which components to disassemble to balance the cost of disassembly. The paper proposes a methodology that finds ways of applications: it can be applied at the design stage to detect space for product design improvements, and it also represents a baseline from organizations approaching de-manufacturing for the first time. The methodology consists of four main steps, in which firstly targets components are identified, according to their environmental impact; secondly their disassembly sequence is qualitatively evaluated, and successively it is quantitatively determined via disassembly times, predicting also the status of the component at their End of Life. The aim of the methodology is reached at the fourth phase when alternative, eco-friendlier End of Life strategies are proposed, verified, and chosen.

Keywords

DemanufacturingCircular economyEcodesignMechatronicsEoL strategies
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 1: ICED21 , August 2021 , pp. 131 - 140
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Andrae, A.S.G. (2016), “Life-cycle assessment of consumer electronics: a review of methodological approaches”, Consumer Electronic Magazine, Vol. 5, pp. 51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ardente, F., Wolf, M-A., Mathieux, F. and Pennington, D. (2011), “Review of resource efficiency and end-of-life requirements. European Commission”, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability. Deliverable 1.Google Scholar
Aydin, R., Kwong, C.K. and Ji, P. (2015), “A novel methodology for simultaneous consideration of remanufactured and new products in product line design”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 169, pp. 127–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Badurdeen, F., Aydin, R. and Brown, A. (2018), “A multiple lifecycle-based approach to sustainable product configuration design”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 200, pp. 756–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belhadj, I., Khemili, I., Trigui, M. and Aifaoui, N. (2019), “Time computing technique for wear parts dismantling”, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 103, pp. 3513–3527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cappelli, F., Delogu, M., Pierini, M. and Schiavone, F. (2007), “Design for disassembly: A methodology for identifying the optimal disassembly sequence”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 18, pp. 563–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fargnoli, M., De Minicis, M. and Tronci, M. (2012), “Product's life cycle modelling for ecodesign product service-system”, International Design Conference.Google Scholar
Favi, C., Marconi, M., Germani, M. and Mandolini, M. (2019), “A design for disassembly tool oriented to mechatronic product de-manufacturing and recycling”, Advanced Engineering Informatics,Vol.39, pp. 62–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2018.11.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frizziero, L., Liverani, A., Caligiana, G., Donnici, G. and Chinaglia, L. (2019), “Design for disassembly (DfD) and augmented reality (AR): Case study applied to a gearbox”, Machines, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 7–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harivardhini, S., Murali Krishna, K. and Chakrabarti, A. (2017), “An Integrated Framework for supporting decision making during early design stages on end-of-life disassembly”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 168, pp. 558–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haziri, L. L., Sundin, E. and Sakao, T. (2019), “Feedback from Remanufacturing: Its Unexploited Potential to Improve Future Product Design”, Sustainability, Vol. 11, p. 4037; https://doi.org/10.3390/su11154037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, M.R. and McCarthy, I.P. (2014), “Product recovery decisions within the context of Extended Producer Responsibility”, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, Vol. 34, pp. 9–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, V., Shirodkar, S., Camelio, J.A., and Sutherland, J.W. (2007), “Value Flow Characterization During Product Lifecycle to Assist in Recovery Decisions”. International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 45, pp. 4555–4572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kwak, M. and Kim, H.M. (2011), “Assessing product family design from an end-of-life perspective” Engineering Optimization, Vol. 43 No 3, pp. 233–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kwak, M. and Kim, H.M. (2011), “Modelling time-varying value of an end-of-life product for design for recovery”, International Conference of Engineering Design.Google Scholar
Luo, Y., Peng, Q. and Gu, P. (2016), “Integrated multi-layer representation and ant colony search for product selective disassembly planning”, Computers in Industry, Vol. 75, pp. 13–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, J., Kwak, M. and Kim, H.M. (2014), Demand trend mining for predictive life cycle design, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 68, pp. 189–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mandolini, M., Favi, C., Germani, M. and Marconi, M. (2018), “Time-based disassembly method: how to assess the best disassembly sequence and time of target components in complex products”, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 95 No. 1–4, pp. 409–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mangun, D. and Thurston, D.L. (2002), “Incorporating component reuse, remanufacture, and recycle into product portfolio design”, IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., Vol. 49, pp. 479–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parliament, E. and Council, U. (2011), “Directive 2011/65/eu of the european parliament and of the council of 8 June 2011 on”, Fundamental Texts On European Private Law, pp. 88–110.Google Scholar
Parliament, E. and Council, U. (2012), “Directive 2012/19/eu of the european parliament and of the council of 4 July 2012 on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE)”, Official Journal of the European Union, No. June, pp. 38–71.Google Scholar
Parliament, E. and Council, U. (2013), “DIRECTIVE 2000/53/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 18 September 2000 on end-of life vehicles”, Official Journal of the European Union, No. L269, pp. 34–43.Google Scholar
Peeters, J.R., Vanegas, P., Dewulf, W. and Duflou, J.R. (2015), “Economic and environmental evaluation of fasteners for active disassembly: A case study for payment terminals”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 29, pp. 704–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, S. and Hung, P.Y. (2015), “A novel selective parallel disassembly planning method for green design”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 26 No. 10-12, pp. 283–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolio, T., Bernard, A., Colledani, M., Kara, S., Seliger, G., Duflou, J., Battaia, O. (2017), “Design, management and control of demanufacturing and remanufacturing systems”, CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 66 No. 2, pp. 585–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J.A.S. (2007), “A review of research towards computer integrated demanufacturing for materials recovery”, International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, Vol. 20 No. 8, pp. 773–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xing, K. and Luong, L. (2009), “Modelling and Evaluation of Product Fitness for Service Life Extension” Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 20, pp. 243–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zink, T., Maker, F., Geyer, R., Amirtharajah, R. and Akella, V. (2014), “Comparative life cycle assessment of smartphone reuse: repurposing vs. refurbishment”, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Vol. 19, pp. 1099–1109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar