single-au.php

IJAT Vol.10 No.5 pp. 699-707
doi: 10.20965/ijat.2016.p0699
(2016)

Paper:

Simultaneous Evaluation of Environmental Impact and Incurred Cost on Selection of End-Of-Life Products Recovery Options

Susumu Okumura*,†, Yuuki Matsumoto**, Yuji Hatanaka***, and Kazunori Ogohara***

*Department of Mechanical Systems Engineering, University of Shiga Prefecture
2500 Hassaka, Hikone, Shiga 522-8533, Japan

Corresponding author

**Division of Electronic Systems Engineering, University of Shiga Prefecture, Shiga, Japan

***Department of Electronic Systems Engineering, University of Shiga Prefecture, Shiga, Japan

Received:
March 29, 2016
Accepted:
August 15, 2016
Published:
September 5, 2016
Keywords:
product recovery, end-of-life (EOL) option, reuse, recycling, disposal
Abstract

Conventional production and consumption systems, in which industrial products are manufactured, consumed, and then finally disposed, have significant environmental impacts. Reusing and recycling product components in the manufacture of industrial products has recently become popular as an effective way of conserving natural resources. In this study, we propose a method to assign each product component a reasonable end-of-life (EOL) option (reuse, recycling, and disposal) in the product design phase. We develop a method, in which a product tree is generated by a multi-agent system, to determine EOL options considering component combinations based on environmental impact and incurred cost. In addition, we optimize the disassembly level for better reuse and recycling. The proposed determination method of EOL options for components in a product is justified by numerical examples using an inkjet printer.

Cite this article as:
S. Okumura, Y. Matsumoto, Y. Hatanaka, and K. Ogohara, “Simultaneous Evaluation of Environmental Impact and Incurred Cost on Selection of End-Of-Life Products Recovery Options,” Int. J. Automation Technol., Vol.10, No.5, pp. 699-707, 2016.
Data files:
References
  1. [1] H.-Y. Kang and J. M. Schoenung, “Electronic waste recycling: A review of U. S. infrastructure and technology options,” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol.45, No.4, pp. 368–400, 2005.
  2. [2] H. Yoshida, K. Shimamura, and H. Aizawa, “3R strategies for the establishment of an international sound material-cycle society,” J. of Material Cycles and Waste Management, Vol.9, No.2, pp. 101–111, 2007.
  3. [3] K. Ulrich and K. Tung, “Fundamentals of product modularity,” American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Design Engineering Division (Publication) DE, Vol.39, pp. 73–79, 1991.
  4. [4] K. Ishii, B. H. Lee, and C. F. Eubanks, “Design for product retirement and modularity based on technology life-cycle,” American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Manufacturing Engineering Division, MED, Vol.2, No.2, pp. 921–933, 1995.
  5. [5] C. Y. Baldwin and K. B. Clark, “Managing in an age of modularity,” Harvard Business Review, Vol.75, No.5, pp. 84–93, 1997.
  6. [6] Y. Umeda, S. Fukushige, K. Tonoike, and S. Kondoh, “Product modularity for life cycle design,” CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, Vol.57, No.1, pp. 13–16, 2008.
  7. [7] P. Gu, M. Hashemian, and S. Sosale, “An integrated modular design methodology for life-cycle engineering,” CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology, Vol.46, No.1, pp. 71–X15, 1997.
  8. [8] J. C. Sand, P. Gu, and G. Watson, “HOME: House of modular enhancement – A tool for modular product redesign,” Concurrent Engineering Research and Applications, Vol.10, No.2, pp. 153–164, 2002.
  9. [9] P. J. Newcomb, B. Bras, and D. W. Rosen, “Implications of modularity on product design for the life cycle,” J. of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME, Vol.120, No.3, pp. 483–490, 1998.
  10. [10] H. Krikke, J. Bloemhof-Ruwaard, and L. N. Van Wassenhove, “Concurrent product and closed-loop supply chain design with an application to refrigerators,” Int. J. of Production Research, Vol.41, No.16, pp. 3689–3719, 2003.
  11. [11] B. González and B. Adenso-Díaz, “A bill of materials-based approach for end-of-life decision making in design for the environment,” Int. J. of Production Research, Vol.43, No.10, pp. 2071–2099, 2005.
  12. [12] P. Ferrão and J. Amaral, “Design for recycling in the automobile industry: New approaches and new tools,” J. of Engineering Design, Vol.17, No.5, pp. 447–462, 2006.
  13. [13] J. S. Meehan, A. H. B. Duffy, and R. I. Whitfield, “Supporting ‘design for re-use’ with modular design,” Concurrent Engineering Research and Applications, Vol.15, No.2, pp. 141–155, 2007.
  14. [14] H.-B. Jun, M. Cusin, D. Kiritsis, and P. Xirouchakis, “A multi-objective evolutionary algorithm for EOL product recovery optimization: Turbocharger case study,” Int. J. of Production Research, Vol.45, No.18-19, pp. 4573–4594, 2007.
  15. [15] J. Li, H.-C. Zhang, M. A. Gonzalez, and S. Yu, “A multi-objective fuzzy graph approach for modular formulation considering end-of-life issues,” Int. J. of Production Research, Vol.46, No.14, pp. 4011–4033, 2008.
  16. [16] S. Fukushige, Y. Inoue, K. Tonoike, and Y. Umeda, “Design methodology for modularity based on life cycle scenario,” Int. J. of Automation Technology, Vol.3, No.1, pp. 40–48, 2009.
  17. [17] G. Seliger and M. Zettl, “Modularization as an enabler for cycle economy,” CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology, Vol.57, No.1, pp. 133–136, 2008.
  18. [18] R. V. Rao and K. K. Padmanabhan, “Selection of best product end-of-life scenario using digraph and matrix methods,” J. of Engineering Design, Vol.21, No.4, pp. 455–472, 2010.
  19. [19] S. Yu, Q. Yang, J. Tao, X. Tian, and F. Yin, “Product modular design incorporating life cycle issues - Group Genetic Algorithm (GGA) based method,” J. of Cleaner Production, Vol.19, No.9-10, pp. 1016–1032, 2011.
  20. [20] Q. Yang, S. Yu, and A. Sekhari, “A modular eco-design method for life cycle engineering based on redesign risk control,” Int. J. of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol.56, No.9-12, pp. 1215–1233, 2011.
  21. [21] Y. Ji, R. J. Jiao, L. Chen, and C. Wu, “Green modular design for material efficiency: A leader-follower joint optimization model,” J. of Cleaner Production, Vol.41, pp. 187–201, 2013.
  22. [22] Y.-J. Ji, X.-B. Chen, G.-N. Qi, and L.-W. Song, “Modular design involving effectiveness of multiple phases for product life cycle,” Int. J. of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol.66, No.9-12, pp. 1475–1488, 2013.
  23. [23] N. Tchertchian, D. Millet, and O. Pialot, “Modifying module boundaries to design remanufacturable products: The modular grouping explorer tool,” J. of Engineering Design, Vol.24, No.8, pp. 546–574, 2013.
  24. [24] S. S. Smith and W.-Z. Wang, “Green modular design by the concept of chemical activation energy,” Int. J. of Automation Technology, Vol.8, No.5, pp. 716–722, 2014.
  25. [25] D. V. Steward, “Design structure system: A method for managing the design of complex systems,” IEEE Trans. on Engineering Management, EM-28, No.3, pp. 71–74, 1981.
  26. [26] M. Kobayashi, Y. Matsumoto, and M. Higashi, “Optimal design of modular configuration considering a product hierarchical function structure for design for environment,” Nihon Kikai Gakkai Ronbunshu, C Hen/Transactions of the Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers, Part C, Vol.79 (807), pp. 4047–4060, 2013. (in Japanese)
  27. [27] “Major materials and wholesale price as of Sep. 18, 2015,” The Nikkan Kogyo Shimbun (Sep. 21, 2015), p. 9, (in Japanese).
  28. [28] The National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST) (Ed.), “The tentative database of GHG emission factors for the CFP pilot project ver. 4.01 (domestic data)” (in Japanese), available at: http://www.cms-cfp-japan.jp/calculate/verify/pdf/CO2kansanryo_db_ver4_jp_20120410.pdf [accessed Feb. 6, 2016]
  29. [29] EnplaNet, “Plastic production statistics in 2014” (in Japanese), available at: http://www.enplanet.com/Company/99999999/Ja/Data/n253.html [accessed Sep. 28, 2015]
  30. [30] Tokyo Commodity Exchange, “Quotes for rubber” (in Japanese), available at: http://www.tocom.or.jp/jp/souba/rubber/?chart=on [accessed Sep. 28, 2015]

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, IE9,10,11, Opera.

Last updated on Dec. 11, 2018