Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Trends and Perspectives of Sustainable Product Design for Open Architecture Products: Facing the Circular Economy Model

  • Review Paper
  • Published:
International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to perform the analysis of literature review regarding the design of open architecture products (OAP) and their potential benefits within the circular economy (CE) model. The analysis involved studying more than 80 research articles during the last two decades in engineering journals. The articles were gathered through a bibliometric analysis using the most relevant keywords concerning product design, sustainability, OAP, and CE. Main trends, challenges and future scopes of research opportunities and development were identified. The study provides a framework to designers and researchers involved in the design of OAP to enhance their sustainability performance for a CE model, which integrates lifecycle considerations (reuse, remanufacturing, repair, and recycle), resource optimization, and emissions reduction. The findings include the need for design methods focused on the design of OAP to guarantee an effective circularity of resources during the whole lifecycle of products and the need of integrating manufacturing processes and material analysis to design products capable of adapting to the CE model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AD:

Axiomatic Design

DFS:

Design for sustainability

OAP:

Open architecture products

CE:

Circular economy

LCA:

Life cycle assessment

DFMA:

Design for manufacturing and assembly

QFD:

Quality function deployment

EOL:

End of life

References

  1. Maxwell, D., & van der Vorst, R. (2003). Developing sustainable products and services. Journal of Cleaner Production, 11, 883–895.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Dornfeld, D. A. (2014). Moving towards green and sustainable manufacturing. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, 1(1), 63–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Um, J., & Suh, S.-H. (2015). Design method for developing a product recovery management system based on life cycle information. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, 2(2), 173–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Kulatunga, A. K., Karunatilake, N., Weerasinghe, N., & Ihalawatta, R. (2015). Sustainable manufacturing based decision support model for product design and development process. Procedia CIRP, 26, 87–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Harper, S., & Thurston, D. (2008). Incorporating environmental impacts in strategic redesign of an engineered system. ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, 130(3), 031101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Byggeth, S., Broman, G., & Robert, K.-H. (2007). A method for sustainable product development based on a modular system of guiding questions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sakao, T. (2007). A QFD centred design methodology for environmentally conscious product design. International Journal of Production Research, 45(18–19), 4143–4162.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Masui, K., Sakao, T., Kobayashi, M., & Inaba, A. (2003). Applying quality function deployment to environmentally conscious design. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 20(1), 90–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bovea, M., & Wang, B. (2007). Redesign methodology for developing environmentally conscious product. International Journal of Production Research, 45(18), 4057–4072.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Ljungberg, L. (2007). Materials selection and design for development of sustainable products. Materials and Design, 28, 466–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Khan, F., Sadiq, R., & Veitch, B. (2004). Life cycle iNdex (LInX): a new indexing procedure for process and product design and decision-making. Journal of Cleaner Production, 12, 59–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chu, C., Luh, Y., Li, T., & Chen, H. (2009). Economical green product design based on simplified computer-aided product structure variation. Computers in Industry, 60, 485–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Vinodh, S. (2010). Sustainable product design using CAD: a case study in an Indian rotary switches manufacturing organisation. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, 3(3), 181–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Younesi, M., & Roghanian, E. (2015). A framework for sustainable product design: a hybrid fuzzy approach based on quality function deployment for environment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 108, 385–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Giudice, F., Balisteri, F., & Risitano, G. (2009). A concurrent design method based on DFMA-FEA integrated approach. Concurrent Engineering, 17(3), 183–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chang, T., Wang, C., & Wang, C. (2013). A systematic approach for green design in modular product development. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 68, 2729–2741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Beng, L. G., & Omar, B. (2014). Integrating axiomatic design principles into sustainable product development. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, 1(2), 107–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Su, J. C. P., Chu, C.-H., & Wang, Y.-T. (2012). A decision support system to estimate the carbon emissions and cost of product designs. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing, 13(7), 1037–1045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Matsumoto, M., Yang, S., Martinsen, K., & Kainuma, Y. (2016). Trends and research challenges in remanufacturing. International Journal of Precision Engineering And Manufacturing-Green Technology, 3(1), 129–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Koren, Y., Hu, S., Gu, P., & Shpitalni, M. (2013). Open-architecture products. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technology, 62, 719–729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Umeda, Y., Kondoh, S., Shimomura, Y., & Tomiyama, T. (2005). Development of design methodology for upgradable product based on funtion-behavior-state modeling. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 19, 161–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N. M., & Hultink, E. J. (2017). The Circular Economy—A new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production, 143(1), 757–768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ramani, K., Ramanujan, D., Bernstein, W. Z., Zhao, F., Sutherland, J., Handwerker, C., et al. (2010). Integrated sustainable life cycle design: A review. Journal of Mechanical Design, 132, 0910041–09100415.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Bovea, M., & Pérez-Belis, V. (2012). A taxonomy of eco-design tools for integrating environmental requirements into the product design process. Journal of Cleaner Production, 20, 61–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Arnette, N., Brewer, B. L., & Choal, T. (2014). Design for sustainability (DFS): The intersection of supply chain and environment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 83, 374–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Buchert, T., Kaluza, A., Halstenberg, F. A., Lindow, K., Hayka, H., & Stark, R. (2014). Enabling product development engineer to select and combine methods for sustainable design. Procedia CIRP, 15, 413–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Brones, F., & Monteiro de Carvalho, M. (2015). From 50 to 1: Integrating literature toward a systemic ecodesign model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 96, 44–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Pigosso, D., McAloone, T., & Rozenfeld, H. (2015). Characterization of the state of the art and identification of main trends of ecodesign tools and methods: Classifying three decades of research and implementation. Indian Institute of Science. Journal, 94(4), 405–427.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ceschin, F., & Gaziulusoy, I. (2016). Evolution of design for sustainability: From product design to design for system innovations and transitions. Design Studies, 47, 118–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Rossi, M., Germani, M., & Zamagni, A. (2016). Review of ecodesign methods and tools. Barriers and strategies for an effective implementation in industrial companies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 12, 361–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Schöggl, J.-P., Baumgartner, R. J., & Hofer, D. (2017). Improving sustainability performance in early phases of product design: A checklist for sustainable product development tested in the automotive industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 1602–1617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Benyus, J. (2002). Biomimicry: Invention inspired by nature. New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Bocken, N., de Pauw, I., Bakker, C., & van der Grinten, B. (2016). Product design and business model strategies for a circular economy. International Journal of Production Management and Engineering, 33, 308–320.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Bakker, C., Wang, F., Huisman, J., & den Hollander, M. (2014). Products that go round: Exploring product life extension through design. Journal of Cleaner Production, 69, 10–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Chiu, M.-C., & Chu, C.-H. (2012). Review of sustainable product design from life cycle perspectives. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing, 13(7), 1259–1272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Charnley, F., Lemon, M., & Evans, S. (2011). Exploring the process of whole system design. Design Studies, 32, 156–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Vanegas, P., Peeters, J. R., Cattrysse, D., Tecchio, P., Ardente, F., Mathieux, F., et al. (2017). Ease of disassembly of products to support circular economy strategies. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 135, 323–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Paterson, D. A., Ijomah, W. L., & Windmill, J. F. (2017). End-of-life decision tool with emphasis on remanufacturing. Journal of Cleaner production, 148, 653–664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kim, S., & Moon, S. K. (2017). Sustainable platform identification for product family design. Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 567–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Favi, C., Germani, M., Luzi, A., Mandolini, M., & Marconi, M. (2017). A design for EOL approach and metrics to favour closed-loop scenarios for products. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, 10(3), 136–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Yu, S., Yang, Q., Tao, J., & Xu, X. (2015). Incorporating quality function deployment with modularity for the end-of-life of a product family. Journal of Cleaner Production, 87, 423–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Wang, X., Chan, H. K., Lee, C. K., & Li, D. (2015). A hierarchical model for eco-design of consumer electronic products. Technological and economic development of economy, 21(1), 48–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Sakundarini, N., Taha, Z., Raja Ghazilla, R. A., & Abdul-Rashid, S. H. (2015). A methodology for optimizing modular design considering product end of life strategies. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing, 16(11), 2359–2367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Pialot, O., Millet, D., Cor, E., & Bisiaux, J. (2015). A method helping to define eco-innovative systems based on upgradability. Procedia CIRP, 30, 185–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Osorio, J., Romero, D., Betancur, M., & Molina, A. (2014). Design for sustainable mass-customization: Design guidelines for sustainable mass-customized products. In Proceedings of the International ICE Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE).

  46. Chou, J.-R. (2014). An ARIZ-based life cycle engineering model for eco-design. Journal of Cleaner Production, 66, 210–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Mascle, C. (2013). Product design for rebirth: Application to aircraft life cycle modelling. Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal, 14(2), 70–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Zwolinski, P., Lopez-Ontiveros, M.-A., & Brissaud, D. (2006). Integrated design for remanufacturable products based on product profiles. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14, 1333–1345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Gu, P., Hashemian, M., & Nee, A. (2004). Adaptable design. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technology, 53(2), 539–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Kimura, F., Kato, S., Hata, T., & Masuda, T. (2001). Product modularization for parts reuse in inverse manufacturing. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technology, 50(1), 89–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Koga, T. & Aoyama, K. (2008). Modular design method for sustainable life-cycle of product family considering future market changes. In Proceedings of the ASME 2008 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, New York, USA.

  52. Yang, Q., Yu, S., & Jian, D. (2014). A modular method of developing an eco-product family considering reusability and recyclability of customer products. Journal of Cleaner Production, 64, 254–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Wang, W., & Tseng, M. M. (2011). Design for sustainable manufacturing: Applying modular design methodology to manage product end-of-life strategy. International Journal of Product Lifecycle Management, 5(2/3/4), 164–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Martinez, M., & Xue, D. (2017). A modular design approach for modeling and optimiation of adaptable products considering the whole product utilization spans. Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, 232(7), 1146–1164. pp. 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Amaya, J., Lelah, A., & Zwolinski, P. (2014). Design for intensified use in product–service systems using lifecycle analysis. Journal of Engineering Design, 25(7–9), 280–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Mestre, A., & Cooper, T. (2017). Circular product design. A multiple loops life cycle design approach for the circular economy. The Design Journal, 20(sup1), S1620–S1635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by COLCIENCIAS through the Ph.D. National Scholarship Program No 617-2. Contract UN-OJ-2014-24072.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Universidad del Norte, Km 5 Vía Puerto Colombia, Barranquilla, 081007, Colombia

    Jaime A. Mesa & Heriberto Maury

  2. Department of Engineering, PennState University-Brandywine, 25 Yearsley Mill Road, Media, PA, 19063, USA

    Iván Esparragoza

  3. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universidad Tecnológica de Bolivar, Km 1 Vía Turbaco, Cartagena de Indias, 131001, Colombia

    Jaime A. Mesa

Authors
  1. Jaime A. Mesa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Iván Esparragoza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Heriberto Maury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jaime A. Mesa.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is not conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mesa, J.A., Esparragoza, I. & Maury, H. Trends and Perspectives of Sustainable Product Design for Open Architecture Products: Facing the Circular Economy Model. Int. J. of Precis. Eng. and Manuf.-Green Tech. 6, 377–391 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40684-019-00052-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40684-019-00052-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation