Research in Engineering Design

, Volume 15, Issue 4, pp 229–241 | Cite as

Life cycle modeling for adaptive and variant design part 2: case study

Original Papers


Life cycle modeling for design (LCMD) facilitates the incorporation of life cycle modeling into product design by including consideration of uncertainty in a product’s final specifications. The methodology combines Life Cycle Assessment with probabilistic design methods in a way that reduces information needs. Part 1 of this article presents the basic LCMD methodology. Here, in Part 2, LCMD is used to evaluate material substitution opportunities to reduce resource consumption, reduce life cycle air emissions, and increase the recyclable mass for a Ford C-class sedan. In addition to further illustrating LCMD, the case study identifies vehicle design scenarios that offer modest improvements in environmental performance and related cost tradeoffs.


Design uncertainty Life Cycle Assessment Design for environment Adaptive design Automobile design 



The Ford Motor Company of Dearborn, Michigan provided financial support for this work. Special thanks are due to Drs. John Sullivan and Dennis Schutzle of the Ford Motor Company for their interest and support in shaping this research.


  1. AAMA (American Automobile Manufacturers Association) (1993) Motor Vehicle Facts and Figures ’93. WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  2. Little AD (undated) Fuel cycle report, prepared for the United States Department of Energy, contract DE-AC36-83CH10093Google Scholar
  3. Anon (1991) Increased magnesium usage: not just due to density. Automotive Eng 99:47–49Google Scholar
  4. Ashby M (1999) Materials selection in mechanical design. Butterworth-Heinemann, BostonGoogle Scholar
  5. Athena Sustainable Materials Institute (2002) US LCI Database Project: Final Phase I Report, Prepared for the United States Department of Energy National Renewable Energy LaboratoryGoogle Scholar
  6. Borland N, Wallace D, Kaufmann HP (1998) Integrating environmental impact assessment into product design. In: Proceedings of 1998 ASME design engineering technical conference, Atlanta, 13–16 September 1998Google Scholar
  7. Cooper JS (2003) Specifying functional units and reference flows for comparable alternatives. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8:337–349Google Scholar
  8. Cullen AC, Frey HC (1999) Probabilistic techniques in exposure assessment: a handbook for dealing with variability and uncertainty in models and inputs. Plenum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Faller K, Froes FH (2001) The use of titanium in family automobiles: current trends. J Minerals Metals Mater Soc 41:27–28Google Scholar
  10. Franklin Associates (1993) Resource and environmental profile analysis: License/Database. Praire Village, KansasGoogle Scholar
  11. Huijbregts MAJ, Norris G, Bretz R, Ciroth A, Benoit M, von Bahr B, Weidema B, de Beaufort (2001) Framework for modeling data uncertainty in life cycle inventories. Int J Life Cycle Assess 6:127–132Google Scholar
  12. Koike S, Washizu K, Tanaka S, Baba T, Kikawa K (2000) Development of lightweight oil pans made of a heat-resistant magnesium alloy for hybrid engines. Society of Automotive Engineers, SAE#2000-01-1117Google Scholar
  13. Nassar A (1991) Design concept of magnesium accessory drive brackets. Society of Automotive Engineers, SAE#910553Google Scholar
  14. Nielsen PH, Wenzel H (2002) Integration of environmental aspects in product development: a stepwise procedure based on quantitative life cycle assessment. J Cleaner Prod 10:247–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Regnier E, Hoffman WF III (1998) Uncertainty model for product environmental performance scoring. In: IEEE international symposium on electronics and the environment. Oak BrookGoogle Scholar
  16. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry Working Group on Data Availability and Uncertainty in LCA (1999) Presentation at the SETAC Europe Annual Meeting, LeipzigGoogle Scholar
  17. Shim YJ, Young JK, Lim TW, Hyun AI, Lee HJ (2000) An application of magnesium alloy to passenger air bag housing. Society of Automotive Engineers, SAE#2000-01-1115Google Scholar
  18. Sindrey DA (1999) Steel bumper systems for passenger cars and light trucks. Society of Automotive Engineers, SAE#1999-01-1007Google Scholar
  19. Sullivan JL (2001) Environmental merit of weight reduction with aluminum or high strength steel. Ford Motor Company Internal Document, DearbornGoogle Scholar
  20. Sullivan JL, Williams RL, Yester S, Cobas-Flores E, Chubbs ST, Hentges SG, Pomper SD (1998) Life cycle inventory of a generic US family sedan: overview of results USCAR AMP Project, Society of Automotive Engineers, SAE#982160Google Scholar
  21. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) (1998) Tier 2 Report to Congress, EPA#420-R-98-008Google Scholar
  22. Weidema BP (1997) Environmental assessment of products: a textbook on life cycle assessment. The Finnish Association of Graduate Engineers TEK, FinlandGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations