Environmentally conscious design by using fuzzy multi-attribute decision-making
Products affect the environment at many points in their life cycles. Once a product moves from the drawing board into the production line, its environmental attributes are largely fixed. Many researchers have focused on developing intelligent systems to provide a variety of design and manufacturing information to help designers make environmentally conscious decisions. However, in the early design stage, not all the information available is precise. A large amount of information, especially those that are based on designer experience, is fuzzy in nature. This paper presents an innovative method, namely green fuzzy design analysis (GFDA), which involves simple and efficient procedures to evaluate product design alternatives based on environmental consideration using fuzzy logic. The hierarchical structure of environmentally conscious design indices was constructed using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP), which include five aspects: (1) energy, (2) recycling, (3) toxicity, (4) cost, and (5) material. After weighting factors for the environmental attributes are determined, the most desirable design alternative can be selected based on the fuzzy multi-attribute decision-making (FMADM) technique. The benefit of using such a technique is to effectively solve the design problem by capturing human expertise.
KeywordsAnalytical hierarchy process Environmental conscious design Fuzzy multi-attribute decision-making
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 4.Fiksel J (1996) Design for environment: creating eco-efficient product and processes. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 7.SETAC (1991) A technical framework for life-cycle assessments. Society for environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- 8.Watkins RD, Kleban SD, Luger GF (1995) Expert system support for environmentally conscious manufacturing. Int J Env Conscious Des Manuf 4(2):53–66Google Scholar
- 9.Chen RW, Navinchandra D, Nair I, Prinz F, Wadehra IL (1995) Selection - an approach for material selection that integrates mechanical design and life cycle environmental burdens. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, pp 68–74Google Scholar
- 10.Presley A, Sarkis J (1994) An activity based strategic justification methodology for ECM technology. Int J Env Conscious Des Manuf 3(1):5–17Google Scholar
- 11.Graedel TE, Stolte BK, Munie GC, Wightman GC (1996) Applying the DFE Toolkit to an electronic switch. In: Proceedings of the 19th IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and Environment, pp 148–153Google Scholar
- 12.Costic M, Sullivan J, Bryant B, Shangguan D (1996) LCI for automotive electronic systems: substitution assessment of Ag-Sn for Pb-Sn solder at Ford Motor Company. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, Piscataway, NJ, USA, pp 58–63Google Scholar
- 14.Terho M (1996) LCA for telecommunication cables. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, Piscataway, NJ, , pp 109–111Google Scholar
- 15.Van Mier G, Sterke C, Steve A (1996) Life cycle costs calculations and green design options using computer monitors as example. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, Piscataway, NJ, , pp 191–196Google Scholar
- 17.Munoz AA, Sheng P (1995) An analytical approach for determining the environmental impact of machining processes. J Mater Process Technol 53(3–4):736–758Google Scholar
- 18.Satty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation. RWS Publications, New York; McGraw-Hill International Book Co., LondonGoogle Scholar